Quashed

Vijay Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC29 May 2012CRM-M/7244/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed FIR No.4 dated 22.1.2011 and consequential proceedings following a genuine compromise between parties, citing Supreme Court precedent and Full Bench jurisprudence.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.4 dated 22.1.2011 and proceedings consequential thereto against the petitioners are quashed.

Vijay Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.M-7244 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-7244 of 2012 Date of decision:29.05.2012

¶5

Vijay Kumar @ Sunny and another

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present: Mr.Kiran Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Rajender Mathur, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

None for the complainant.

¶14

RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)

¶15

Quashing of FIR No.4 dated 22.1.2011 registered under Sections 382, 323, 341 and 411 of IPC at Police Station, Daresi, Ludhiana and the proceedings consequential thereto are being sought on the basis of compromise dated 3.3.2012 (Annexure P-4).

¶16

The impugned FIR was got registered on the statement of complainant/respondent No.2 on the allegations that two clean shaven persons snatched a sum of Rs.600/- as well as mobile from the complainant and caused injuries to him. In this background, the impugned FIR was registered.

¶17

At the stage of recording evidence before the trial Court, the matter has been compromised, which is evident from compromise deed dated 3.3.2012, Annexure P-4.

¶18

In compliance of the order dated 13.3.2012, status report

¶19

CRM No.M-7244 of 2012

¶20

¶21

has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana. As per the status report, the complainant stated in his statement that the matter has been compromised with the accused persons and does not want to pursue the present case and has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed. To the same effect, the statements of accused Saajan Kumar and Vijay Kumar have been recorded. It has also been mentioned in the report that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine.

¶22

After going through the status report, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation as the dispute between the parties has been settled.

¶23

Consequently, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008 (4) S.C.C. 582 and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007 3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, FIR No.4 dated 22.1.2011 registered under Sections 382, 323, 341 and 411 of IPC at Police Station, Daresi, Ludhiana and the proceedings consequential thereto are quashed qua the petitioners.

¶24

The petition stands disposed of.

¶25

29.05.2012 mks

¶26

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

Vijay Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & 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

Monica and Anr. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.

Savitri Devi etc. Vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam etc.

Surender Kumar Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

M/S Sandeep Kumar Vs Chairman Punjab State Power Corporation and Ors.

Sunder Lal Vs Union of India & Ors.

Hament Kumar Vs State of Punjab & Ors.