A single judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana accepted a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an FIR. The Court quashed the proceedings based on an amicable compromise between the parties.
The impugned FIR No. 339 dated 14.4.2010 and all its consequential proceedings 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.
Criminal Misc. No. M-13857 of 2011
1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.
Criminal Misc. No. M-13857 of 2011
Date of Decision: 26.5.2011
Narender Lather and Others
…Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and Others
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.
Present: Mr. Vikas Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Sandeep S. Mann, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 339 dated 14.4.2010, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 447, 511 and 34 IPC on the basis of compromise (Annexure P2) arrived at between the parties.
In the present case, the impugned FIR was registered on the basis of a statement made by respondent No.2-Gulshan Kumar son of Kimti Lal, wherein he has stated that he had studied upto ninth class. On 14.4.2010 at about 11.00 A.M., he was opening his Provisional Store where he had installed STD and Photostat machines. 12 persons came
Criminal Misc. No. M-13857 of 2011
2
and attacked him with knives and rods. It is stated that Surinder Pal was armed with a rod, Maharaj Krishan Dhawan was having a danda, Nitu Man, who was discharged lateron, was armed with knife, Narender Lather was having Rod, Rinku and Pandit were having dandas. He stated that Rinku and Pandit were found innocent. It is stated that the case is pending only against four persons namely Narender Lather, Bhupinder Pal Sethi, Maharaj Krishan Dhawan and Surinder Pal, who have filed the present petition. The persons are stated to have given injuries to the complainant Gulshan Kumar and Baldev Raj.
Gulshan Kumar and Baldev Raj are present in this Court today. They have been identified by Ajaib Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal, who has come to assist the learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1, on instructions from Ajaib Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal, has submitted that except the present four petitioners, no other person has been named in the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. It is stated that two witnesses have been examined and the next date fixed before the trial Court is 3.6.2011. Complainant Gulshan Kumar and Baldev Raj have stated that due to intervention of the respectables of the locality, a compromise has been arrived at. They have decided to bury their hatchet and promote everlasting peace and amity.
Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate, appearing for respondents No.2 and 3, has also filed their affidavits and the same are taken on record. Mr.Saini has submitted that the impugned FIR be quashed along with all the consequential proceedings so that the accused/petitiones
Criminal Misc. No. M-13857 of 2011 3
and respondents No.2 and 3, who are living in the same vicinity, may bed able to maintain cordial relations.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has submitted that in case the parties have resolved their dispute amicably, the State will not stand in the way of the parties to resume their cordial relations. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the petitioners will not take law in their own hands and will continue to live a life of honest and peaceful citizens.
Taking totality of the circumstances into consideration that the parties have resolved their dispute amicably and the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , the present petition is accepted. The impugned FIR along with all its consequential proceedings is quashed.
(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 26, 2011 “ DK ”
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR and proceedings can be quashed upon the basis of an amicable compromise between the parties.
Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. permits quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under Section 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 447, 511 and 34 IPC based on a settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anotherReferred¶27
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Narender Lather and Others
State of Haryana
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
