Anil Kumar Soni And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 18.12.2019 (i) CRM-M-37683-2019 (O&M) Anil Kumar Soni and others ....Petitioners Vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (ii) CRM-M-31260-2019 (O&M) Rajesh Kumar Soni ....Petitioner Vs State of Punjab ....Respondent (iii) Anil Kumar ....Petitioner Vs State of Punjab ....Respondent ***** CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH
Present:
Mr. D.S. Malka, Advocate, for Mr.Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. A.P.S. Gill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Amit Rana, Advocate, for the complainant.
*****
{2} AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J. (ORAL) CRM-M-37683-2019 Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 06.09.2019, the report of the learned JMIC, Amritsar, dated 17.10.2019, is on record, stating therein that the petitioners, i.e. the accused-Anil Kumar Soni, Rajesh Kumar @ Ricky Soni, Pardeep Kumar, Sanjeev Kumar and Navdeep Singh, as also the respondents, i.e. Sourav, Kartar Chand and Sunil Kumar (i.e. the complainant party), appeared before that Court on 26.09.2019 and got recorded their statements to the effect that the matter has been compromised between them; and as per the assessment of that Court, the compromise effected is without any pressure or coercion. It has also been recorded that as per the statement of ASI-Amar Singh of Police Post Sun City, Amritsar, the persons have never been declared to be proclaimed offenders.
Though learned State Counsel submits that the injuries inflicted on the side of the complainant are serious, however, with the matter having been amicably settled between the parties and there at least being no allegations of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC, I see no reason to not allow the petition, which is consequently allowed and FIR No. 73 dated 30.06.2019, registered under Section 452, 323, 324, 148, 149 IPC (with Section 325 IPC added later on), at Police Station Mohkampura, Amritsar, is hereby quashed along with all proceedings arising therefrom.
{3} CRM-M-31926-2019 and CRM-M-31260-2019 By these two petitions, anticipatory bail was sought by the petitioners, pursuant to the aforesaid FIR having been registered. With the FIR itself having been quashed here-in-above, these petitions have been rendered infructuous and are disposed of accordingly. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of the other connected cases.
December 18, 2019 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No