Tarsem Singh Alias Kala v. State Of Punjab And Another

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:23.03.2021 (HEARD THROUGH VC) Tarsem Singh alias Kala

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Present:- Mr. Mandeep Kumar Dhot, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Naresh Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.146 dated 15.09.2020 registered under Sections 336, 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Longowal, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 23.09.2020 (Annexure P-2). 2.

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant on the allegations that the accused-petitioner threatened to kill him with his 12 bore gun. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

3.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a

-2compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sangrur stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

4.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and the counsel for the respondent-State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

6.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

7.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.146 dated

-315.09.2020 registered under Sections 336, 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Longowal, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.

March 23, 2020 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Pankaj* JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No