Allowed

Gurbir Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Sept 2012CRM-M/13565/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, under Section 482 CrPC, allowed a petition to quash an FIR regarding theft and cheating (Sections 427/436/34 IPC) based on a compromise executed between the complainant and the accused, holding that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging litigation.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.272 dated 27.10.2011 and all consequential criminal proceedings arising out of it are quashed.

Gurbir Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-13565 of 2012 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-13565 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.09.2012

¶5

Gurbir Singh and another

¶6

....Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Punjab and another

¶9

....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present: - Mr. R.S. Pandher, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶13

¶14

PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶15

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.272 dated 27.10.2011, registered under Sections 427/436/34 IPC at Police Station Divn. No.5, Civil Line, District Ludhiana City, along with all consequential proceedings arising out of it, on the basis of compromise 02.05.2012 (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) RCR (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 support the prosecution and from other facts and circumstances available on the record, therefore, 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

¶17

-2-

¶18

Crl. Misc. No. M-13565 of 2012 (O&M)

¶19

compound non-compoundable offence.

¶20

Learned counsel for the complainants, on instructions from the complainant, states that complainant would have no objection, if the present FIR along with consequential proceedings, arising out of it, are quashed.

¶21

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant has also handed over an affidavit dated 08.09.2012 to the above effect, which is taken on record.

¶22

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 judgment of this Court in Bhupinder Kaur's case (supra) no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

¶23

Present petition is allowed. FIR No.272 dated 27.10.2011, registered under Sections 427/436/34 IPC at Police Station Divn. No.5, Civil Line, District Ludhiana City, is hereby quashed and all the criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR also stand quashed.

¶24

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge

¶25

September 14, 2012 R.S.

Gurbir Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbir Singh 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

Sukhrampal Vs State of Haryana

Dharminder Singh @ Lakhy Vs State of Punjab and Nar.

Sukhwinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Hatte Singh Vs State of Haryana

Harish Goyal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Harjinder Singh & Ors. Vs Harinder Singh & Anr.