Ranjeet Singh & Another v. State Of Punjab And Another

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-7062 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:22.5.2017 Ranjeet Singh and another

...Petitioners

v.

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

....

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Mohit Sadana, Advocate for the petitioners. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for the quashing of FIR No.39 dated 11.3.2013 registered for the offences under Sections 387, 385, 506 and 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur lodged by respondent No.2 against the petitioners and all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise (Annexure-P.3). I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the record.

As argued, the petitioners have already been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court and the appeal is pending against the judgment.

A perusal of the FIR shows that it was got registered by Lajpat Rai-complainant. As per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant is Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.05.30 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-7062 of 2017 [2] owner of the Zinc Factory. From 25.2.2013 to 3.3.2013, he had received calls on his mobile phone many times and it was stated that he was Bittu Rao alias Bittu Khataria and they are criminal type of persons and their group needs money and asked the complainant to arrange `20-30 Lakhs and provide them, otherwise they will kidnap his elder son Vicky. It was also stated that if the complainant would inform the Police, then he and his family have to suffer dire consequences etc. It is also in the FIR that again on 9.3.2013, Bittu Rao alias Bittu Khataria called him and the complainant told him that he can arrange `5 Lakhs, upon which Bittu Rao said that he should send the money on 11.3.2013 and they will collect the money etc. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, nature and gravity of the offences, I do not find it a fit case where the FIR is liable to be quashed on the basis of compromise specially when the petitioners have already been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court.

Therefore, finding no ground for quashing the FIR, this petition is dismissed.

May 22, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.05.30 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh