Allowed

Gurvinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Oct 2012CRM-M/22541/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR based on a compromise. The court allowed the petition after verifying the compromise and aiming to preserve village fraternity, quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.114 dated 25.10.2011 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the present petitioners.

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

¶1

CRM No.M- 22541 of 2012 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No.M-22541 of 2012 (O&M)

¶4

Date of decision : 17.10.2012

¶5

Gurvinder Singh and others

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶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, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the private respondents

¶14

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶15

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing of FIR No.114 dated 25.10.2011, under Sections 325, 324, 323, 308, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC') registered at Police Station Ajnala, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioners as well as for private respondents jointly submit that since the parties have arrived at an out of Court settlement by way of compromise, the impugned FIR along

¶17

CRM No.M- 22541 of 2012 -2-

¶18

with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are liable to be quashed.

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

Learned counsel for the parties have admitted the factum of compromise having been reached between the parties without any coercion. The parties are residents of the same village. Separate affidavits of complainant-respondent Nos.2 & 3, have already been filed in the Court, wherein, the factum of compromise has been reiterated. In Criminal Misc. No. M-14547 of 2012, the cross-version of this case has been quashed vide order of even date against respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the basis of compromise by this court.

¶21

Keeping in view the compromise and the fact that the village fraternity would be preserved by removing hostilities of the parties, this Court feels that no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings alive.

¶22

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.114 dated 25.10.2011, under Sections 325, 324, 323, 308, 148, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Ajnala, District Amritsar, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed, qua the present petitioners.

¶23

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶24

17.10.2012 sarita

Gurvinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurvinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurmangat Singh Vs State of Pb.Etc.

Rupinder Singh @ Ruby & Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Lakha Singh Vs State of Punjab

Hardev Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Jain Udhay Hosiery Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S Mahaluxmi Silk Store

M/S Jain Udhay Hosiery Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S Mahaluxmi Silk Store