High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/44187/2023disposed of

Khuswant Narwal v. State Of Haryana And Another

2024-03-11Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi3 pages

- 1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision : March 11, 2024 Khuswant Narwal ......Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and another ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present:- Mr. Sikandh Mehta, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Goel, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Raghav Bali, Advocate for the complainant.

*** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.388 dated 04.03.2023 under Sections 506, 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, 1989 registered at Police Station Karnal Civil Lines Karnal and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 26.07.2023 (Annexure P-2) entered into between the parties.

Vide order dated 16.11.2023 this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in terms of certain parameters given in the aforesaid order dated 16.11.2023

- 2with regard to the compromise dated 26.07.2023 (Annexure P-2). In terms of the order dated 26.05.2023 passed by this Court parties have appeared before the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal and as per report dated 06.03.2024 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties have effected a genuine compromise without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote possibility of the complainant coming forward to support the prosecution case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in "Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".

Further, the learned counsel for the petitioners, while placing reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jayrajsinh Digvijaysinh Rana Versus State of Gujarat and another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in Joginder Singh & another Vs. State of Punjab and another, CRM-M-23739-2010 decided on 27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another, CRM-M37395-2016 decided on 16.05.2017, Bhoj Raj Vs. State of Punjab & another, CRM-24945-2019 decided on 27.09.2019 and Vimal Kalra & others Versus State of Punjab & another, CRM-M-20355-2022, decided

- 3on 25.07.2022 submits that partial quashing of the FIR was possible on the basis of a compromise.

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana accompanied by statements of both the parties, the FIR No.388 dated 04.03.2023 under Sections 506, 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, 1989 registered at Police Station Karnal Civil Lines Karnal and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner only.

Petition stands disposed of.

( JASJIT SINGH BEDI ) JUDGE March 11, 2024 satish Whether speaking/reasoned : YES / NO Whether reportable : YES / NO