Manga Ram Alias Mangu v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 2023:PHHC:134361 Date of decision: October 16th, 2023 Manga Ram @ Mangu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Himanshu Jain, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. A.P.S. Tung, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Vishal Satija, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 (i) and (ii).

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) The petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No.214 dated 10.12.2015 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 325 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Patiala along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom including judgment of conviction dated 24.02.2022 passed by leaned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patiala, on the basis of compromise dated 12.07.2023 (Annexure P-4).

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement subsequent to the conviction of the petitioner. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon judgment of this Court in Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another 2013(4) RCR (Criminal) 102 and Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 titled as

-2- 'Ramawtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh' decided on 25.10.2021 : LL 2021 SC 589, wherein it has been held that the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash a complaint/FIR on the basis of a voluntary compromise even at a post conviction stage.

3.

Vide order dated 21.08.2023 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court on 14.09.2023 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

4.

Report has since been received from learned ACJM, Patiala, in pursuance of 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 respondents No.2 (i) and (ii) have also made a statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the petitioner is quashed.

5.

The learned ACJM, Patiala, has annexed copies of the statements of the parties along with his report. 6.

In view of the report of the learned ACJM, Patiala, and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 titled as 'Ramawtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh' decided on 25.10.2021 : LL 2021 SC 589 and this Court in Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another : 2013(4) RCR (Criminal) 102, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including judgment of

-3conviction and order of sentence dated 24.02.2022 passed by leaned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patiala, are quashed. 7.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. October 16th, 2023 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No