Sumitri Devi & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-894 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:3.6.2016 Sumitri Devi and others .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents ....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Prashant Vashisth, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

None for the complainant-respondent No.2.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.131 dated 10.7.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Navi Baradari, Jalandhar City and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantBeaso Devi on the allegations that the accused-petitioners by hatching conspiracy have cheated him. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably settled and compromise has been

Cr. Misc. No.M-894 of 2016 [2] entered into between the parties, therefore, 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 30.5.2016 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 admits the factum of compromise and submits 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 have gone through the record.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a 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

Cr. Misc. No.M-894 of 2016 [3] petition is allowed and FIR No.131 dated 10.7.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC at Police Station Navi Baradari, Jalandhar City and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. June 3, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*