Dorothy Howell And Othrs v. State Of Punjab And Another
CRM-M-21950-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21950-2024 (O&M)
Reserved on: 03.09.2024
Date of Pronouncement: 16.09.2024
Dorothy Howell & others ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab & another
...Respondent (s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. R.S. Sekhon Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Gauravdeep Singh Dhillon, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. A.P.S. Virk, Advocate for Mr. B.K. Saini, Advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3.
*** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 19.04.2018 Cantt. Ferozepur, District Ferozepur 451, 323, 148, 149 IPC The petitioner(s), arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved person(s). 2.
During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, the accused and the aggrieved person(s) have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.
3.
After that, the petitioner(s) came up before this Court to quash the FIR, impleading the aggrieved persons as respondent nos.2 and 3. 4.
Pursuant to order of this Court dated 29.05.2024, the complainant-aggrieved person (R-2), appeared before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur and stated that there would be no objection if the Court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 22.7.2024, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat. ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.16 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
CRM-M-21950-2024 ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5.
However, an analysis of the FIR reveals that there are specific allegations against the petitioners that they had also given beatings to sister of the complainant namely Rabina. Though the petitioners have arraigned her as respondent no.3 in this case, but her statement has not been recorded before the concerned Court. 6.
Since all the victims did not state their no objection to the compromise and also the reasons which led to the compromise, as such this Court cannot proceed further in this matter.
7.
Given above, the petition is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file a fresh petition and there would be no necessity to re-examine the complainant-victim and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The copies of the statements along with report would suffice. Petition dismissed in the terms mentioned above, with liberty reserved. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE September, 2024 AK Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes Whether reportable :
No ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.16 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh