Allowed

Ranjit Singh &Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Oct 2012CRM-M/15156/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of an FIR registered under various IPC sections. Upon receipt of reports confirming an out-of-court settlement without coercion, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 229 dated 19.10.2011 and all consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioners.

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

¶1

Crl.Misc.No.M-15156 of 2012 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl.Misc.No.M-15156 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 01, 2012

¶5

Ranjit Singh and others

¶6

...... PETITIONERS

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

..... RESPONDENTS

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶11

Present: Mr.Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Mehardeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr.Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶13

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.

¶14

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing of FIR No.229 dated 19.10.2011, registered under Sections 452,323,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'), at Police Station City Tarn Taran (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

¶15

The parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded.

¶16

In compliance of the order dated 23.08.2012, report of

¶17

Crl.Misc.No.M-15156 of 2012 (O&M)

¶18

¶19

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran dated 29.09.2012 has been received along with statements of the parties regarding an out of Court settlement.

¶20

Affidavits of Ranjit Kaur wife of Ajaib Singh and Santokh Singh son of Sulakhan Singh, respondents No.2 and 3 are taken on record with regard to factum of compromise. They have stated that they have no objection, if the FIR in question is quashed as the matter has been compromised. The said statements prove that the compromise is without any pressure or coercion.

¶21

Learned State counsel, on instructions from Assistant Sub Inspector Manpreet Singh, also submits that he has no objection in case present petition is allowed.

¶22

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, this petition is allowed and FIR No.229 dated 19.10.2011, registered under Sections 452,323,148,149 IPC, at Police Station City Tarn Taran and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed, qua the petitioners.

¶23

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶24

October 01, 2012 jt

Ranjit Singh &Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh &Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

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

Kamaljit & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Gulzar Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab

Kirna Rani Vs State of Punjab

Nishan Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Kishan Lal @ Krishan Lal Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mukesh Kumar and Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.