A petitioner filed a quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC alleging settlement between parties. The Court relied on a Full Bench precedent to quash the FIR and consequent proceedings.
FIR No.81 dated 25.09.2011 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom 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.
1
Criminal Misc.M-No.16258 of 2012(O & M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.M-No.16258 of 2012(O & M) Date of Decision:27.09.2012
Satpal Singh & ors.
....petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab & anr.
.....respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr.R.S.Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr.Luvinder Sofat, AAG Punjab
None for respondent No.2
JITENDRA CHAUHAN J.
The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the FIR No.81 dated 25.09.2011 under Sections 324, 323, 148, 149 IPC (Annexure P-1), read with Section 326 IPC, registered at Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 09.05.2012 (Annexure P-2), reached between the parties.
Heard.
In pursuance of the order dated 29.05.2012 passed by this Court, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar has sent his report dated 14.09.2012 alongwith the statements of parties. In his statement, the complainant Kuldeep Singh son of Sadhu Singh has stated that he has voluntarily entered into a compromise (Annexure P-2) without any fear or pressure and as such have no objection if FIR in question and consequent proceedings may be quashed. A compromise deed dated 09.05.2012 has been appended with the petition as Annexure P-2, wherein also the complainant has stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is
Criminal Misc.M-No.16258 of 2012(O & M)
2
quashed.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sukhdev Raj, Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar, also states that the parties have entered into a compromise.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings. In view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052, the Court is competent to quash the proceedings on the basis of compromise.
In view of the above, the FIR No.81 dated 25.09.2011 under Sections 324, 323, 148, 149 IPC, read with Section 326 IPC, registered at Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioners namely Satpal Singh, Jatinder Singh, Saudagar Singh, Surinder Kaur, Kulwinder Singh, Sukhwinder Kaur, Parabjinder Singh @ Prabhu and Kashmira Singh.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed.
(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE
27.09.2012
neenu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 324, 323, 148, 149 and 326 IPC should be quashed on the basis of a compromise.
Whether a Full Bench judgment permits quashing of proceedings despite non-cognizable nature of the section if compromise is reached.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and anotherApplied¶23
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satpal Singh & ors.
State of Punjab
Jitendra Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
