Prem Chand And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: March 18, 2017 1) Crl. Misc. No.M-46269 of 2016 (O&M) Prem Chand and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
2) Crl. Misc. No.M-46276 of 2016 (O&M) Jatinder Kumar and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM -M-46269-2016 and for respondent no.2 in CRM-M-46276 of 2016.
Mr. Bhim Singh, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM-M-46276-2016 and for respondents no.2 to 5 in CRM-M-46269-2016. Mr. K.S. Pannu, DAG, Punjab *** Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) Pursuant to the order dated 23.12.2016, passed in CRM-M46276-2016, a report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur, dated 30.01.2017, has been received, stating therein that the statements of the complainant, Kamal Kishore, i.e. respondent no.2 in the said petition, as also the statements of the accused, Jatinder Kumar, Vivek Dogra, Ashok Kumar, Vipun Kumar, Vikrant Khajuria and Abhishek, i.e.
petitioners no.1 to 6 in CRM-M-46276-2017, were recorded in respect of the compromise reached between the parties, which they stated has been effected voluntarily between them.
As regards CRM-M-46269-2016, a separate report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur, of the same date, has been received, stating therein that the statements of the complainant, Vivek Dogra, i.e. respondent no.2, along with the injured, Vipun Kumar, Abhishek and Vikrant Khajuria, i.e. respondents no.3 to 5, as also the statements of the accused, Prem Chand, Satish Kumar, Ganesh Pal, Janak Raj, Rakesh Kumar, Kamal Kishor, Rajinder Kumar @ Nandu, Kaushal Sharma @ Roshan Sharma, i.e. petitioners no.1 to 8, were recorded in respect of the compromise before that Court and as per the assessement of that Court, the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine. The complainants in both the petitions have stated that they have no objection if the FIR and the cross version thereto, are quashed.
In view of the above compromise reached between the parties, in respect of which the statements of the parties have been recorded, and seeing the nature of the offences in each case, i.e. in FIR No.70 dated 07.07.
petition is allowed.
Consequently, the aforesaid FIR No.70 dated 07.07.2013 and the cross version thereto, registered vide Rapat No.25 dated 08.07.2013, in respect of the aforesaid offences, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.
March 18, 2017 (Amol Rattan Singh) vcgarg Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No