Sanjeev Bhatti @ Aman Chohar And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRM-M No.34701 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.34701 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 16.12.2017 ...

Shanjeev Bhatti @ Aman Chohar and others ................Petitioners vs.

State of Punjab and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: Mr. R.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Kang, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Samina Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

Mr. Naveen Sharma Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3 ...

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral) Petitioners - Sanjeev Bhatti @ Aman Chohar and others have brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of DDR No. 31 dated 8.4.2017, for offences under Sections 323, 148, 149 IPC, in FIR No. 42 dated 8.4.2017 under Sections 323, 148, 149 IPC (Section 325 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar, Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, against

CRM-M No.34701 of 2017 -2them, alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been effected between them and complainant Khushmandeep Singh and Gurwinder Singh - arrayed as respondents No.2 and 3.

When the petition came up for hearing on 9.11.2017, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 - State of Punjab through State counsel, whereas respondents No.2 and 3 through Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate, had put in appearance. Then in light of the contention that parties have since effected compromise, they were directed to put in appearance before the trial Court to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the trial Court was directed to send a report to this Court.

Report has been received from Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Muktsar Sahib, in terms of which complainant Kushmandeep Singh and Gurwinder Singh and accused Sanjeev Bhatti @ Aman Chohar, Harpreet Singh @ Preet, Harmeet Singh, Revaro, Avtar Singh Aulakh, Rajan Kumar and Sabu, had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, with free will, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Further complainant has stated that they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed by this Court. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of the compromise so arrived at between the parties. Alongwith the report copies statements of the complainant and the accused, have been annexed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

CRM-M No.34701 of 2017 -3State counsel, besides going through the record. It is stated that challan is yet to be filed. It is a case of students fight. Keeping in view the fact that the dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, which appears to have been arrived at between them voluntarily without any threat or coercion and in terms of ratio of the authority reported as Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, where in para 28, it has been held as under :- "The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice".

Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases.

CRM-M No.34701 of 2017 -4course of a litigation." The compromise is in interest of peace and tranquility in the society and for such like reasons this Court can quash the FIR and ancillary proceedings exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears to be a fit case to exercise such powers.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the abovesaid DDR and FIR alongwith ancillary proceedings are hereby quashed. ( H.S. Madaan ) Judge 16.12.2017 chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No