Boota Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-33457 of 2014 .....

Date of decision:21.1.2015 Boota Singh and others .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents ....

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Jashanjot Singh Uppal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chandumajra, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. B.K. Sharma, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.113 dated 20.9.2013 registered for the offences under Sections 452, 323, 506, 148 and 34 IPC at Police Station Sandhaur, District Sangrur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 17.10.2013 (Annexure-P.2). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantSukhbir Singh as the accused-petitioners attacked him with their respective weapons and inflicted injuries. Now with intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between

Cr. Misc. No.M-33457 of 2014 [2] the parties and they have resolved their dispute, therefore, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Malerkotla, District Sangrur has sent his report dated 16.1.2015 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant Sukhbir Singh has stated that he has entered into compromise with the accused persons without any pressure, undue influence, coercion and without consuming any intoxicant substance and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainantrespondent No.2 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 petitioners as well as learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 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

Cr. Misc. No.M-33457 of 2014 [3] 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 amicably settled and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, wherein it has been held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable, this petition is allowed and FIR No.113 dated 20.9.2013 registered for the offences under Sections 452, 323, 506, 148 and 34 IPC at Police Station Sandhaur, District Sangrur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

January 21, 2015.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*