Shanti And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM-M-27848-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-27848 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision: July 30, 2018 Shanti and others .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another .... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Ms. Manpreet Kaur Shergill, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Armaan Gagneja, Advocate for Ms. Harmeet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No.20 dated 16.02.2017 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 452, 324, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station Julka, District Patiala along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).

As per case of the prosecution, the occurrence took place on 16.02.2017, when the petitioners armed with weapons came to the house of complainant and caused him injuries.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has since been settled vide compromise, copy of which has been placed on file as Annexure P-2.

Jyoti 2018.08.02 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-27848-2017 -2Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant endorses the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners and has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) is quashed.

Learned State counsel has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

In order to verify the veracity and genuineness of the settlement between the parties, they were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 05.02.2018 stating therein that the compromise has been effected between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties to this petition an opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.

For the reasons as discussed above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua petitioners, is quashed. (SURINDER GUPTA) July 30, 2018 JUDGE Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Jyoti 2018.08.02 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document