Quashed

Raj Kumar @ Raju and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Sept 2012CRM-M/20557/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quased two criminal petitions, CRS NO. M-20557 of 2011 and CRS NO. M-20979 of 2011. The Court disposed of the matters by quashing the FIR and subsequent proceedings based on a confirmed compromise between parties.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 47 and all subsequent proceedings, including the cross case, were quashed.

Raj Kumar @ Raju and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM NO. M-20557 OF 2011 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM NO. M-20557 OF 2011 (O&M) DECIDED ON : 04.09.2012

¶5

Raj Kumar @ Raju and anr.

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

State of Punjab and anr.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

and

¶11

CRM NO. M-20979 OF 2011 (O&M)

Amit Kumar

...Petitioner

versus

State of Punjab and anr.

¶16

...Respondent

¶17

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. C. PURI

¶18

Present : Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM No. M-20557 of 2011. Mr. B. D. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM No. M-20979 of 2011. Mr. S. S. Chandumajra, DAG, Punjab.

¶19

K. C. PURI, J. (ORAL)

¶20

CRM NO. 26225 OF 2012

¶21

The application stands allowed and the document Annexure P-5 is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

¶22

CRM NO. M-20557 OF 2011 (O&M)

¶23

-2-

¶24

MAIN CASE

¶25

By this common order, I intend to dispose of two petitions bearing Crl. Misc. No. M-20557 of 2011 titled as, “Raj Kumar @ Raju and another vs. State of Punjab and another” and Crl. Misc. No. M-20979 of 2011 titled as, “Amit Kumar vs. State of Punjab and another”, as they have arisen out of the same FIR.

¶26

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIR No.47 dated 13.03.2008 under Sections 325/324/323 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station C Division, District Amritsar, on the basis of compromise, along with all subsequent proceedings arising from that FIR.

¶27

Learned counsel for the parties have stated at the bar that the matter has been compromised. Report of the trial Coourt has also been received in which it is mentioned that the parties have arrived at a compromise and both the cross cases have been settled.

¶28

So, in view of the above circumstances and in view of authority reported as, “ Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others” 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the

¶29

above said FIR stands quashed. Further proceedings in pursuant to that FIR also stands quashed. The cross case also stands quashed.

¶30

Disposed of.

¶31

SEPTEMBER 04, 2012 (K. C. PURI) shalini JUDGE

Raj Kumar @ Raju and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar @ Raju 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

Sanjay S/O Sukhbir Vs State of Haryana

Pooja Vs State of Haryana

Surender Vs State of Haryana

Sukhpal Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Daljit Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana