Allowed

Heera Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Mar 2010CRM-M/2678/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR registered under Sections 307/326/324/148/149 IPC and Arms Act sections. Court relied on Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, noting compromise with intervention of respectable persons, absence of firearm injury, and existence of a licensed gun.

What did the court decide?

Impugned FIR No. 269 dated 27.12.2009 along with all consequential proceedings is hereby quashed.

Heera Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No.M- 2678 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: 19.03.2010.

¶3

Heera Singh and another.

¶4

...... PETITIONERS

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others.

¶7

...... RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Abhishek Chautala, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

Mr. S.S.Goraya, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.

¶12

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.269 dated 27.12.2009, registered under Sections 307/326/324/148/149 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, at P.S. ‘B’ Division, Amritsar, Annexure P1, on the basis of compromise, Annexure P2, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise having been entered into between the parties

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

CRM No.2678 of 2010

¶18

It has been stated by learned counsel for the parties that parties belong to same locality and that compromise has been effected due to intervention of the respectable persons of the locality.

¶19

Respondents No.2 to 5 also appeared in person and stated that they have no objection if the present FIR is quashed. They have also filed reply by way of affidavit and admitted the factum of compromise.

¶20

Reply on behalf of State has also been placed on record. It has been stated by learned State counsel that there is no fire arm injury and injuries attributed to the petitioners are only simple in nature. It has also been stated that gun used is also a licenced gun and no injury was caused by the said gun. He has also stated that there is no opinion of the medical officer that any of the injuries is dangerous to life.

¶21

In appropriate cases FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab , 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 .

¶22

Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and compromise has been effected between them due to intervention of the respectable persons, and in the interest of harmonious relations between the parties, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 269 dated 27.12.2009, registered under Sections 307/326/324/148/149 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, at P.S. ‘B’ Division, Amritsar, Annexure P1 alongwith all consequential proceedings, is, hereby quashed.

¶23

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶24

March 19, 2010. 'om'

¶25

CRM No.2678 of 2010 3

Heera Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Vinay Mehndirata and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Rajinder Nath Verma and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Baljinder Singh @ Gandhi Vs State of Punjab

Gurdev Singh @ Gopi Vs State of Punjab