Allowed

Rajesh @ Judge and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Jul 2012CRM-M/12156/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR registered for offences of causing death by negligence, dangerous driving, and mischief, basing the decision on a confirmed compromise between the parties and a finding that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging litigation.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.20 dated 06.01.2012 and all other proceedings arising therefrom under Sections 304-A, 279, 427 IPC were quashed.

Rajesh @ Judge and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM M-12156 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM M-12156 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 20, 2012

¶5

Rajesh @ Judge and another

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. Avtar S. Khinda, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Munish Gulati, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶14

Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral)

¶15

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.20 dated 06.01.2012, under Sections 304-A, 279, 427 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur on the basis of compromise dated 11.04.2012 (Annexure P/2).

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the matter of Bhupinder Kaur vs. State of Punjab and another, 2004(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 443 to contend that there is no reasonable likelihood of the accused being convicted for the offence for the reason that the complainant has compromised the matter with the accused and he is not likely to

¶17

CRM M-12156 of 2012 2

¶18

support the prosecution and from other facts and circumstances available on the record,it would not be in the interest of justice to decline the prayer for quashing of the FIR on the ground that it would amount to be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offence.

¶19

Learned counsel for respondent no.2-complainant has handed over an affidavit dated 20.07.2012 of Shiv Badan Sharma, which is taken on record. In this affidavit, the complainant has confirmed the factum of compromise and he has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in question.

¶20

Learned counsel for the complainant, on instructions from the complainant, who is present in Court today, states that complainant would have no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.

¶21

Consequently, in view of compromise (Annexure P/2) and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 and Bhupinder Kaur's case (supra), no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

¶22

Present petition is allowed. FIR No.20 dated 06.01.2012, under Sections 304-A, 279, 427 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, and all other proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶23

July 20, 2012 vkd

¶24

[ Paramjeet Singh ] Judge

Rajesh @ Judge and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh @ Judge and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Nahar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Daljit Singh @ Bittu and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rachna Vs State of Punjab

Sukhdev Singh @ Sukhpal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Aashu @ Aash Mohd. Vs State of Haryana