Gurpreet Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM-M-49515 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1.

CRM-M-49515 of 2017 Date of decision: 28.09.2018 Gurpreet Singh and others .. Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another .. Respondents 2.

CRM-M-12740 of 2018 Gurpreet Singh .. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another .. Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. P.B.S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM-M-49515-2017.

Mr. P.B.S. Goraya, Advocate for Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Mann, Advocate for petitioner in CRM-M-12740-2018.

Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

None for respondent no. 2.

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The petitioners have filed above-captioned petitions under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No.80 dated 06.09.2017 (Annexure P-s), registered for offences punishable under Sections 341/323/160/148/149/506 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

As per case of the prosecution, the occurrence took place on 05.09.2017, when respondent no. 2-complainant was caused injuries by petitioners in both the petitions.

JITENDER KUMAR 2018.09.28 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the matter has

CRM-M-49515 of 2017 -2since been settled vide compromise, copy of which has been placed on file as Annexure P-2.

Learned State counsel has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

In order to verify the veracity and genuineness of the settlement between the parties, they were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court in its reports dated 19.01.2018 and 12.07.2018 sent in both the petitions has stated that the compromise has been effected between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties to this petition an opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.

For the reasons as discussed above, both the petitions are allowed and impugned FIR No.80 dated 06.09.2017 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 341/323/160/148/149/506 IPC at Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua petitioners, is quashed. September 28, 2018 (SURINDER GUPTA) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JITENDER KUMAR 2018.09.28 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh