Chanpreet Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJABD & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (Through Video Conferencing) CRM-M 26602/2021(O&M) Date of decision: 04.02.2022 Chanpreet Singh and another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present:- Mr.Umesh Aggarwal,Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Prateek Sodhi,Advocate for respondents 2 and 3. ****** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL,J.(ORAL) The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.212 dated 11.7.2020 under Sections 109/354-D/506 IPC registered at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar Rural and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) effected between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on account of trivial misunderstanding between the parties, FIR in question came into the existence. However, subsequent to the registration of FIR, parties have amicably resolved all their disputes and entered into compromise dated 31.05.2021 (Annexure P-2) Vide order dated 13.7.2021 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

Report has since been received from the learned Judicial RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.02.04 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-26602-2021 -2Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar in pursuance to 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 the complainant has also made statement to the effect that she would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed. The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties alongwith its report.

Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 does not controvert the submissions made by counsel opposite and also does not oppose the prayer made by counsel for the petitioner for quashing of the FIR in question.

In view of the report of the learned JMIC, Amritsar and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and in Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014(2) RCR (Criminal) 482, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. 04.02.2022 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) joshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.02.04 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document