← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/45498/2024allowed

Anoop Kumar v. State Of Punjab And ANR

2024-11-04Ms. Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan3 pages

 Sr. No.291

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 04th November 2024 ANOOP KUMAR ........Petitioner versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR .......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present:

Mr. Balwant Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. B.S. Singhvi, Advocate for respondent No.2.

HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (ORAL) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.31 dated 01.03.2021, under Sections 406, 498-A IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Women, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed dated 03.09.2024 (Annexure P-2), executed between the parties.

2.

This Court, vide order dated 12.09.2024, had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. 3.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, the learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 21.10.2024 with the following observations:-

 "xxx xxx xxx xxx 1.

As per the statement of partics, the compromise effected between the appearing complainant Anjali @ Anjali Sood and accused Anoop Kumar, seems to be genuine.

2. As per the statement of parties, Anjali @ Anjali Sood is only complainant/victim in the present FIR and she and the accused Anoop Kumar are party to the compromise.

3. As per the statement of Investigation Officer, during investigation no additional accused has been added and both the complainant Anjali @ Anjali Sood and accused Anoop Kumar are party to the compromise.

4. As per the statement of parties and Investigation Officer, no one has been declared Proclamed Offender in the preent FIR.

5. As per the statement of Investigation Officer, during investigation no offence after registration of FIR has been added or deleted.

6. As per the statement of Investigation Officer, no investigation is pending against any of the accused and no one has been declared innocent.

xxx xxx xxx xxx"

4.

Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 6.

Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007"

(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others" (2012) 10 SCC 303, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.31 dated 01.03.2021, under Sections 406, 498-A IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Women, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.

 7.

However, the respondent No.2 and the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of this order, in case the final terms and conditions of compromise deed dated 03.09.2024 (Annexure P-2) are violated. 8.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN) JUDGE 04th November 2024 simran Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No