Ajay Pal Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

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

(1) Criminal Misc. No.M-9843 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:11.4.2016 Ajay Pal Singh .....Petitioner v.

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

(2) Criminal Misc. No.M-9834 of 2016 .....

Gurvinder Singh and another .....Petitioners v.

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

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Jasmeet Singh Ghumman, Advocate for the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No.M-9843 of 2016 and for the respondent No.2 in Cr. Misc. No.M-9834 of 2016.

Mr. Manbir Singh, Advocate for the petitioners in Cr. Misc. No.M-9834 of 2016 and for respondents No.2 and 3 in Cr. Misc. No.M-9843 of 2016.

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

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This order will dispose of the above mentioned two criminal miscellaneous petitions i.e. Criminal Misc. No.M-9843 of 2016 filed under

Cr. Misc. Nos.M-9843 of 2016 etc.

[2] Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.274 dated 11.11.2014 registered for the offences under Sections 323 and 325 IPC at Police Station Rama Mandi, District Jalandhar City and Criminal Misc. No.M-9834 of 2016 filed for quashing of DDR No.53(A) dated 12.11.2014 registered for the offence under Section 324 IPC in FIR No.274 dated 11.11.2014 as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. The FIR and the DDR were got registered against each other by the petitioners of both the petitions as dispute arose as a result of fight between the parties in which injuries were received by both the parties. This is a case of version and cross-version. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, both the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and have effected a compromise.

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 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar has sent his two reports dated 4.4.2016 in both the cases submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainants 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 and the DDR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme

Cr. Misc. Nos.M-9843 of 2016 etc.

[3] Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners in both the petitions 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, these petitions are allowed and FIR No.274 dated 11.11.2014 registered for the offences under Sections 323 and 325 IPC at Police Station Rama Mandi, District Jalandhar City and DDR No.53(A) dated 12.11.2014 registered for the offence under Section 324 IPC in FIR No.274 dated 11.11.2014 as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

April 11, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*