Paramjeet Singh & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ORS

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.3829 of 2015 and Criminal Misc. No.M-42193 of 2014 .....

Date of decision:5.2.2015 Paramjeet Singh and others .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents ....

Present:

Mr. Gaurav Tangri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. Ashish K. Gupta, Advocate for complainant-respondents No.2 and 3.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

Cr. Misc. No.3829 of 2015:

For the averments made in the criminal miscellaneous application, Section 452 IPC is added in the head note and prayer clause of the above mentioned petition.

The criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of. Cr. Misc. No.M-42193 of 2014:

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.219 dated 1.7.2009 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 452 IPC, which was added later on) at Police Station Maqsudan,

Cr. Misc. No.M-42193 of 2014 [2] District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 1.11.2014 (Annexure-P.2). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantPritam Kaur on the allegations that the accused-petitioners attacked her and her son and inflicted injuries. Now with intervention of friends and respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, has sent his report dated 29.1.2015 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondents No.2 and 3 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for complainant-respondents No.2 and 3 and have gone through the record. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a

Cr. Misc. No.M-42193 of 2014 [3] loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.219 dated 1.7.2009 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 452 IPC, which was added later on) at Police Station Maqsudan, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

February 5, 2015.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*