Ranjodh Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.215 Case No. : Crl. Misc. No.M-43680 of 2021 Date of Decision : January 05, 2022 Ranjodh Singh and others ....
Petitioners vs.
State of Punjab and another ....
Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL. (Through Video Conferencing) Present :
Mr. Saurav Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Tarun Singla, Advocate for respondent no.2.
* * * MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J.
(Oral) :
The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.0008 dated 08.03.2017, lodged under Sections 498-A, 406, 313, 306, 116, 323, 120-B of IPC, registered at Women Police Station, District Bathinda (charges framed under Sections 498-A, 406, 313, 323, 120-B of IPC) and the consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise dated 31.05.2021 (Annexure P-5) arrived at between the parties.
Vide order dated 14.10.2021 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between them.
Report has since been received from learned ASJ, Bathinda, in pursuance to the direction of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report, compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant have no objection if the FIR qua the accusedMONIKA 2022.01.06 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document petitioners is quashed.
Crl. Misc. No. M-43680 of 2021 : 2 :
Learned State counsel, on instructions, apprised this Court that the petitioners have not been charged under Sections 306 & 116 of IPC and were charged only under Sections 498-A, 406, 313 of IPC. He further submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 also does not dispute the factum of the compromise.
In view of the report of the learned ASJ, Bathinda and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by a Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it are quashed. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. January 05, 2022 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No MONIKA 2022.01.06 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document