Sukhdev Singh And Others v. The State Of Punjab And Another

CRM-M-22628-2024 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22628-2024 Decided on: 22.07.2024 Sukhdev Singh and others ......Petitioners Vs.

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Fatehjeet Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** ANOOP CHITKARA J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 03.12.2019 City Kapurthala, Distt.

323, 324, 148, 149 IPC Kapurthala The petitioners, 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. 2.

During the pendency of criminal proceedings, the accused and the aggrieved person have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.

3.

After that, the petitioner came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, impleaded the aggrieved person as respondent. 4.

On 07.06.2024, the aggrieved person-Raghbir Singh (R-2) stated before the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Kapurthala (Duty) 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 15.06.2024, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat.

ANJU RANI 2024.07.26 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-22628-2024 --2-- ANALYSIS & REASONING:

5.

Counsel for the State submits that two persons were injured, whereas, one injured namely Raghbir Singh has been impleaded as party-respondent No.2 and other injured Harmanjit Singh has not been impleaded as party. 6.

Since all the victims have not been impleaded as party, 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/aggrieved person(s) and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The copies of the statements alongwith report would suffice. Petition dismissed in the terms mentioned above, with liberty reserved. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 22.07.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

ANJU RANI 2024.07.26 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh