Bhupinder Kaur And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRM-M-2761 of 2013 (O&M)



   
  CRMM2761 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision:23.03.2015 Bhupinder Kaur and others $.Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others $.Respondents      




Present:

Mr. Aminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.S. Grewal, DAG, Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. P.S. Guliani, Advocate for Mr. Mandeep Singh Brar, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3. 

 1.

This is a petition under Sections 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.170 dated 5.8.2009 registered under Sections 420,465,467,468,471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Malerkotla, District Sangrur, along with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.

2.

Parties are present and they have stated that the compromise has been arrived at.

3.

The backdrop of the matter is that complainant Ruldu Khan (respondent No.2) had registered the criminal case against the petitioners, who had represented that they were owners of a particular land, though they were not actually the owners and thus the petitioners parted with money on dishonest inducement by the complainant.
4.

The petitioners had paid back the money to the complainant, who made a statement before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur that he did not want ISHWAR SINGH GARHWAL 2015.03.25 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-2761 of 2013 (O&M) to proceed with the case against the present petitioners. Statements of the petitioners and Sattar Mohammad (respondent No.3) were also recorded. The Chief Judicial Magistrate also recorded his satisfaction that the statements were made voluntarily and without any pressure.
5.

Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 also submits that compromise stands effected and they have got their money from the petitioners.
6.

Chargesheet has not yet been presented by the police in the court.
7.

In view of this, there should not be any impediment in allowing the parties to compromise the matter. Support to this view can be had from the authority Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, 2008 (2) RCR (Criminal) 429, wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court has ruled that in such type of cases where the dispute is of personal nature, Court should ordinarily accept the compromise. 8.

In view of the facts delineated above, the petition is accepted. The above said FIR and the proceedings connected therewith are hereby quashed. 9.

Disposed of.

  

              23.03.2015 ishwar ISHWAR SINGH GARHWAL 2015.03.25 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document