Lalta Ram And ORS v. State Of Haryana And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22964-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.05.2024 Lalta Ram and ors.
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana & ors.
...Respondent (s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Mohan Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Sr. DAG Haryana.
Ms. Aarushi Garg, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 12.
*** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 12.03.2022 Ambala Cantt., Haryana 148, 149, 186, 323, 332, 353, 379-B and 506 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 to 12. 4.
Pursuant to order of this Court dated 08.05.2024, the aggrieved persons namely Ajay Kumar Gupta, Bhupinder Singh, Sandeep Kumar, Avtar Singh, Naveen Kumar, Mangal Singh, Manish Kumar and Suresh Pal (R Nos.-2 and 6 to 12), appeared before
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ambala and stated that there would be no objection if the Court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. The report of concerned Court reads as follows:
Name of the reporting Court Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala Criminal Case no.
before trial Court 106 of 2023-SC 1.
Names of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) Ajay Kumar, Naveen Kumar, Sandeep Kumar, Avtar Singh, Bhupinder Singh, Suresh Pal, Manish Kumar and Mangal Singh @ Inderjeet Singh 2.
Dates on which the statement(s) of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) were recorded 15.05.2024 3.
Has the identity of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) been verified?
Yes 4.
Whether all the victims/ all the aggrieved persons have compromised the matter?
Yes 5.
Is there pressure, threat, or coercion upon the victim(s)/aggrieved person(s)/complainant?
Yes 6.
Names of the accused person(s) Lalita Ram, Arun, Ravi and Babu 7.
Dates on which the statement(s) of the accused persons(s) recorded 15.05.2024 8.
Whether all the accused have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have compromised.
Yes 9.
Whether proclamation proceedings are pending against any accused?
No 10.
Has the police report been filed or not?
Yes 11.
Notice of accusation /Charges have been framed or not?
Yes 12.
Sections of statutes invoked in the matter Challan was submitted only under Sections 186, 323, 332, 353, 379B and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
However, it is pertinent to mention here that FIR was registered under Sections 148, 186, 323, 332, 353, 379B and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC 13.
Whether the court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise?
Yes ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5.
As per the report of the concerned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, all the
victims/aggrieved persons, who were prevented from discharging their official duties, did not appear and as such the veracity of compromise could not be ascertained. 6.
Given above, the matter cannot be compromised. However, it shall be open for the accused to apply to this court seeking another opportunity to make complainant/victim(s) appear before the concerned court to record their no-objection statement(s). In that eventuality, there would be no need for the accused to re-appear, and they can annex the copy of the statement(s) recorded in this petition. Petition dismissed in the terms mentioned above. Liberty is reserved to file a fresh petition. All pending applications, if any stand closed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE May 28, 2024 AK Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes Whether reportable :
No