Allowed

Amarjit Singh etc. v. State of Punjab etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Sept 2011CRM-M/11585/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special bail application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court quashed FIR No. 3 dated 20.01.2011 invoking Sections 452/149/427/323 IPC. The court held that since the dispute was settled via compromise verified by the Illaqa Magistrate and the complainant was unwilling to prosecute, further proceedings were futile.

What did the court decide?

FIR bearing No. 3 dated 20.01.2011 and subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Amarjit Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab etc. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-11585 of 2011 (O & M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-11585 of 2011 (O & M) DATE OF DECISION: September 02, 2011

¶5

Amarjit Singh and others

¶6

.........PETITIONER(S)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

........ RESPONDENT(S)

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

¶11

Present: Mr. Pardeep Rajput, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

¶12

Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶13

AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prays for quashing of FIR bearing No. 3 dated 20.01.2011 under Sections 452/149/427/323 IPC, P.S. Islamabad, Amritsar on the basis of compromise dated 06.04.2011 (Annexure P-2).

¶15

Vide order dated 20.04.2011, the parties were directed to appear before Illaqa Magistrate so as to verify the factum of compromise.

¶16

Report dated 04.05.2011 has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar which is to the effect that compromise has been effected. The concerned persons have further stated that the statements have been made voluntarily in support of the fact that the disputes have been settled by way of compromise.

¶17

Learned counsel for the respondent-State states that since the parties have settled their disputes by way of compromise, State would have no objection to quashing of the FIR and proceedings.

¶18

Crl. Misc. No. M-11585 of 2011 (O & M)

¶19

¶20

Since respondent no. 2-complainant is not ready to prosecute the petitioners, continuance of proceedings shall be an exercise in futility. The factum of compromise has already been verified by the Illaqa Magistrate.

¶21

In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR bearing No. 3 dated 20.01.2011 under Sections 452/149/427/323 IPC, P.S. Islamabad, Amritsar and subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed.

¶22

02.09.2011 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE

¶23

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶24

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Amarjit Singh etc. v. State of Punjab etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjit Singh etc. v. State of Punjab etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajinder Singh Vs Gurmel Singh

Kamini Devi Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Ratna Devi and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jasneet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Parminder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.