This judgment quashes FIR No. 49 and ancillary proceedings for theft after a valid compromise was recorded during trial before the Judicial Magistrate, relying on Supreme Court and High Court precedents on compromise.
FIR No. 49 dated 20.3.2007 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner 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.
Crl. Misc. No. M-10223 of 2013 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-10223 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 16,2013
Deepak @ Deepu ..................................... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .................. Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri
Present: Mr. Harmanjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, AAG, Punjab.
RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)
Quashing of FIR No. 49 dated 20.3.2007 under Sections 454, 380 IPC registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana (Annexure P1) is being sought on the basis of compromise dated 29.8.2012 (Annexure P-2).
The FIR has been recorded on the statement made by Santosh alleging that on 16.3.2007 Deepak @ Deepu had committed theft in her house as she had not on good terms with him. She had kept the money for the marriage of her
Kaur Rupinderdaughter. 2013.08.21 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-10223 of 2013 (O&M) [ 2 ]
During the pendency of the trial, a compromise was effected between the parties on 29.8.201 (Annexure P2).
In compliance of the order dated 1.4.2013, status report dated 29.5.2013 has been filed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana. As per this report, statement of the parties have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter and the compromise deed is placed on record as Mark-C1 and the affidavit of the complainant is Mark-C2. The complainant-Santosh also stated that she has no objection if the FIR in the present case is quashed.
In view of the statements of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings.
Consequently, in view of the above circumstances and 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. 49 dated 20.3.2007 under Sections 454, 380 IPC registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana (Annexure P1) is
Kaur Rupinder 2013.08.21 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-10223 of 2013 (O&M) [ 3 ] quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner.
Petition is disposed of.
16.8.2013 Rupi
( RITU BAHRI ) JUDGE
Kaur Rupinder 2013.08.21 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether FIR No. 49 under Sections 454, 380 IPC be quashed upon valid compromise between the parties.
Whether the compromise is genuine and the continuing of criminal proceedings serves no useful purpose.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of PunjabExplained¶19
Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008 (4) S.C.C. 582 · Who else cites this
Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and anotherExplained¶19
Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052
Deepak @ Deepu
State of Punjab
Ritu Bahri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
