Ranjit And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others
!!!
"#$
%$&'('
)* + +
* , - + . /.
Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4.
/. 0
1"2* !"#$#%& '('% )
*
*
+ , - '''('' .
" Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana and Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate appearing on advance notice accept the same on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 to 4, respectively. They have no objection to the acceptance of the prayer of the applicants. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The date of hearing in the main petition is preponed from 2.2.2022 to today itself.
With the consent of the parties, the main petition is taken
on Board.
/%0 )
1$' ! !
+
2*3 * 45. %&6 %66'(%$
#'# #'1 #1%&(6
, #15!7 #'65!
8
*
3
* *
+
+ +
%&9'(%: /'0 )
+
+ *
45,
*
** 2 %&6'(%$ +"
+ *
* ;,
* ,
"
)
,
2 ,
< *
7
+8
/#0 )
,
+ +
+
/10 =::'(%:
,
53 * > * *
+
,
* + +
%&9'(%: /&0 )
#%('(%:
,
/60 4;
!
!
"#
"
!
" #" "
$ %!
/90 The Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another, 2017 AIR (SC) 4843 laid down the broad principles governing the exercises of powers of quashing of FIR. It was held that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised by the High Court to secure the ends of justice, to prevent abuse of any process of law and in cases where in view of the compromise the possibility of conviction is remote and continuation of proceeding will cause oppression and prejudice. /$0 )he parties are from the same village and have bridged their differences, decided to proceed ahead rather than indulging in litigation. No useful purpose would be served by continuing with the trial. To meet the ends of justice and considering that the chances of conviction are bleak, the FIR mentioned above and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
[9] The petition is allowed.
/.
)% $&$34$10 & %?
2*>
@
>.
'?
@
>.