Karan Kumar Alias Kannu And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: May 31st, 2024 Karan Kumar @ Kannu and others .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Yashveer Kharb, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Vikas Gulia, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Yadav, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.1159 dated 06.11.2017 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341 and 506 of the IPC registered at Police Station Panipat City, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.05.2023 and 22.05.2023 respectively, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, on the basis of compromise dated 17.08.2023 (Annexures P-3 and P-4). 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement subsequent to the conviction of the petitioners in above mentioned case FIR. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon judgment of this Court in Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another: 2013(4)

-2RCR (Criminal) 102 and Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 titled as Ramawtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh LL 2021 SC 589, wherein it has been held that the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash a complaint/FIR on the basis of a voluntary compromise even at the post conviction stage.

3.

Vide order dated 20.04.2024 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned Appellate Court on 26.04.2024 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

4.

Report has since been received from learned Sessions Judge, Panipat, in pursuance of the direction of this Court, wherein the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report, compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and respondents No.2 and 3 have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the petitioners is quashed. 5.

The learned Sessions Judge, Panipat, has annexed the copies of the statements of the parties along with his report. 6.

In view of the report of the learned Sessions Judge, Panipat, and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 titled as Ramawtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh decided on 25.10.2021: LL 2021 SC 589 and this Court in 'ube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another: 2013 (4) RCR (Criminal) 102, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom

-3including judgment/order of conviction dated 15.05.2023/2.05.2023 passed by JMIC, Panipat, are quashed qua the petitioners and the offences under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341 and 506 of the IPC are hereby compounded.

7.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. May 31st, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No