Hindpal Gupta v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-31288 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:14.11.2017 Hindpal Gupta .....Petitioner v.

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents ....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Fariad Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ayush Sarna, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. Gurminder Singh Salana, Advocate for complainantrespondents No.2 to 6. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.140 dated 5.8.2009 (Annexure-P.2) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC at Police Station Samrala, District Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.3). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantHarnek Singh on the allegations that the accused-petitioner struck his Wagnor car against the back side of the Indica car of the complainant without blowing horn in a negligent manner. As a result of this accident, respondents No.2 to 6 received injuries. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the

Cr. Misc. No.M-31288 of 2016 [2] parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala has sent report dated 12.7.2017 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondents No.2 to 6 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been

Cr. Misc. No.M-31288 of 2016 [3] amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.140 dated 5.8.2009 (Annexure-P.2) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC at Police Station Samrala, District Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioner. November 14, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No