High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/41559/2014allowed

Gurmit Singh Dhillon And ANR v. Ut Of Chandigarh And ANR

2015-07-31Mr. Justice Dr. Shekher Dhawan2 pages

CRM-M-41559 of 2014 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-41559 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision : 31.07.2015 Gurmit Singh Dhillon and another .......Petitioners

Versus

U.T. Chandigarh and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH

Present:

Mr. Maninder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Ashima Mor, APP, UT, Chandigarh.

Mr. Gaurav Grover, Advocate for Mr. Sunny Saggar, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

R.P. NAGRATH, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of cross-version recorded vide FIR No. 170 dated 28.09.2014 for offences under Sections 323, 336 and 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Sector 3, Chandigarh on the basis of compromise.

Learned APP, U.T. Chandigarh on instructions from SI Balbir Singh submits that petitioners are the only accused but beside Sahil Mehta-complainant the other effected persons, namely; Anmol Sharma, Anirudh Sharma and Sabir have not been impleaded as necessary respondents in the instant petition. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that Anmol Sharma, Anirudh Sharma and Sabir Singh are the three of the petitioners out of four in CRM-M-1687 of 2015, which is also JITENDER KUMAR 2015.08.03 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-41559 of 2014 -2a petition for quashing of FIR and consequential proceedings against the petitioners on a cross-version at the instance of Ameet Dhillon and they have all made statements in the trial Court on compromise in that petition.

The report from the trial Court has been received after recording statement of respondent no. 2 and the petitioners and it is reported that the compromise reached between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. No useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (P&H) and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, (2012)10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 170 dated 28.09.2014 for offences under Sections 323, 336 and 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Sector 3, Chandigarh and subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the compromise and the statements made by them.

July 31, 2015 (R.P. NAGRATH ) jk JUDGE JITENDER KUMAR 2015.08.03 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh