This High Court quashed an FIR registered under various cheating and forgery sections of the IPC based on a post-filing compromise reached between the parties, relying on the Full Bench judgment in Kulwinder Singh versus State of Punjab.
FIR No. 133 dated 17.4.2010 and all consequent proceedings arose from it are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No. M-12949 of 2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-12949 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on : 22-09-2011
Kanwar Singh and others
....Petitioners
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
Present:Mr. Ashish Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr.J.S.Rattu, DAG, Haryana
Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 and 3
MAHESH GROVER, J
Reply has been filed in the Court today and the same is taken on record. A copy thereof has been supplied to the counsel opposite.
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of FIR no. 133 dated 17.4.2010 registered under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Sohna, District Gurgaon and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that during the pendency of the proceedings pursuant to the FIR, the parties have resolved their differences amicably and in view of this, they do not wish to pursue with the litigation any further.
On 7.7.2011, this Court directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court and get their statements recorded in support of their claim that
Crl. Misc. No. M-12949 of 2011 (O&M) 2
the matter has been compromised. Trial Court was also directed to send the report about the factum of compromise and also the fact that such statements were not result of any undue pressure or coercion.
Report has since been received from the concerned Court and according to it, petitioners as well as respondents no.2 and 3 have appeared and got recorded their statements on their own free will in support of their compromise.
In view of the above facts and also keeping in view the observations of Full Bench in Kulwinder Singh versus State of Punjab 2007 (3) Law Herald 2225 , the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR no. 133 dated 17.4.2010 registered under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Sohna, District Gurgaon and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
September 22, 2011 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an FIR registered under Sections 420, 465 to 471 IPC and Section 120-B IPC can be quashed on the basis of a post-filing compromise.
Whether the recorded statements of parties affirming the compromise were voluntary and free from coercion.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh vs State of PunjabReferred¶21
Kulwinder Singh versus State of Punjab 2007 (3) Law Herald 2225
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kanwar Singh and others
State of Haryana
Mahesh Grover
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
