Disposed

Hawa Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Jul 2012CRM-M/31130/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Criminal Miscellaneous petition was filed to direct the lower appellate court to consider a compromise settlement made between the appellants and the complainant during the pendency of an appeal against conviction. The court directed the lower court to take the compromise into account.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Lower Appellate Court at Fatehabad to consider the factum of compromise while deciding the preferred appeal.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-31130 of 2011 Date of Decision : July 04, 2012

Hawa Singh & others

..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & another

¶7

..... RESPONDENT(S)

¶8

. . .

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶10

. . .

¶11

PRESENT: - Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Rajiv Malhotra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent No.1.

¶13

Mr. Virender Mandhan, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶14

. . .

¶15

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J (Oral)

¶16

This petition has been filed for quashing FIR No.59 dated 22.2.2002, under Sections 323, 324, 326, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Bhattu Kalan, District Fatehabad, and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.

¶17

After registration of the case, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented against the petitioners for their prosecution for commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326,

¶18

Crl. Misc. No.M-31130 of 2011 [2]

¶19

506 read with Section 34 IPC. Vide judgment dated 17.11.2009, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad held all the petitioners guilty for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and awarded the various terms of sentences vide order dated 18.11.2009. The said judgment dated 17.11.2009 and the order of sentence dated 18.11.2009 are under challenge before the Court of Session at Fatehabad.

¶20

During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioners have sorted out their dispute with the private respondent/ complainant/injured. A copy of the affidavit of Mangal Ram evidencing the factum of compromise has been annexed as Annexure P-4 with the present petition.

¶21

Learned counsel for respondent No.2, Mangal Ram son of Khyali Ram admits the factum of compromise.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that learned Lower Appellate Court may be directed to consider the factum of compromise while deciding the appeal.

¶23

In view of the above, learned Lower Appellate Court at Fatehabad is directed to consider the factum of compromise while deciding the appeal, preferred by the petitioners.

¶24

Disposed of.

¶25

(Naresh Kumar Sanghi)

¶26

July 04, 2012 Judge avin

Hawa Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hawa Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

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

Mukesh Kumar Solanki Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Hem Lata and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karam Chand Vs Punjab State Coop. Bank Ltd.

Mohd. Sharik & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

M/S Hoshiarpur Large & Medium Industries Asoc. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Anil Kumar Garg Vs Naurang Dass and Ors.