Parmod Kumar v. State Of Punjab

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 124+269 Date of Decision:- 18.12.2024 
 
....Petitioner(s)

Versus




 

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present :

Mr. Charitr Kadian, Advocate for Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG Punjab.






 

!"

##
 $ ***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) %&'($)*&$($)


"!#
""+  + #
!
,#
+

" +#
#



 -#
--

" +! .+

 
(*(/$($)
#


0!

#

#!


"

+ + #


-"+## &1

+#
2!
+-"
!

!"

##
 $
+#

"

+ + #
#
+#

-"+# 
 

"

+ + # +# #!

" 
#




-#
--

" +! 3#
+2
 

"!#
""+  + #
+!
 2
-# --

" +!
+!
4#
#



+!

5
+!
+





!-

"" "+ 
" 

-2CRM-M-38530-2024 By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR (Annexure P1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/settlement dated 24.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows: FIR No.

Dated Sections Police Station 27.04.2024 406, 420 IPC;

24 of the Immigration Act NRI, District Hoshiarpur 2.

With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 24.05.2024 (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The + +
+!

 
+!

%!!
6 !+" vide report dated 01.10.2024 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. The petitioner has also deposited the cost of Rs.5000/- in compliance to the order dated 09.08.2024. 3.

Respondent No.2 is represented by his counsel and does not oppose the compromise.

4.

In view of the aforesaid report of the + +
+!

 
+!

%!!
6 !+" and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and "Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another",

-3- (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. 5.

In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.20 dated 27.04.2024 under Sections 406, 420 IPC; 24 of the Immigration Act registered at Police Station NRI, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 18.12.2024 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No ii) Whether reportable?

Yes/No