Gora Singh & ANR v. State Of Punjab & ANR

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-9116 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:31.5.2016 Gora Singh and another .....Petitioners v.

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

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. J.S. Khiva, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. H.S. Kotli, Advocate for complainant-respondents No.2 and 3.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.18 dated 25.2.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 308 and 34 IPC at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa and challan presented under Sections 307, 308, 323 and 34 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantKrishan Chand on the allegations that the accused-petitioners attacked his son and inflicted injuries to him. Learned counsel for the petitioners

Cr. Misc. No.M-9116 of 2016 [2] contended that both the parties belong to same locality and the above FIR has been registered due to some misunderstanding. He further argued that the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 have agreed to live peacefully in their village and they will not create any trouble in the future. Now with the intervention of 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 District & Sessions Judge, Mansa has sent her report dated 6.5.2016 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 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-9116 of 2016 [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.18 dated 25.2.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 308 and 34 IPC at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa and challan presented under Sections 307, 308, 323 and 34 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

May 31, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*