Allowed

Sushil Dabra and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2013CRM-M/10553/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash an FIR registered under various sections of the IPC. The court exercised inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, relying on a compromise between the parties and a Full Bench decision, to quash the proceedings involving a property dispute among family members.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR No. 159 dated 21.08.2006 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Sushil Dabra and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-10553 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-10553 of 2013

¶5

Date of Decision : May 24, 2013

¶6

Sushil Dabra and another

¶7

.... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Punjab and another .... Respondents

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶11

¶12

Present : Mr. R. K. Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Roopam Aggarwal, DAG, Punjab for respondent no. 1.

¶14

Mr. Pankaj Sahotra, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

¶15

¶16

L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :

¶17

Accused Sushil Dabra and Deepka Dabra have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No.159 dated 21.08.2006 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian

¶18

Penal Code (in short – IPC), registered at Police Station City, Sri Muktsar Sahib, in view of compromise (Annexure P-2) effected with respondent no.

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-10553 of 2013

¶20

¶21

2 – complainant.

¶22

Affidavit of respondent no.2 – complainant, filed today in Court, is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

¶23

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

¶24

Counsel for respondent no.2 – complainant, on instructions from respondent no.2, said to be present in person in the Court, stated that parties have effected compromise (Annexure P-2), and therefore, respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the impugned FIR is quashed. Affidavit of respondent no. 2 to the same effect has also been placed on record in the Court today.

¶25

In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2007

¶26

(3) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana) 2225 .

¶27

In the instant case, it is stated that there was some dispute regarding property, which has been amicably settled. It is also stated that parties are closely related and belong to the same family. In view thereof, it is a fit case in which FIR should be quashed so that the parties may maintain their harmonal and cordial relationship.

¶28

Resultantly, the instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR

¶29

Crl. Misc. No. M-10553 of 2013

¶30

¶31

Annexure P-1 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom.

May 24, 2013

monika

( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE

Sushil Dabra and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Dabra and Anr. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Pacific Educational Academy Vs Amit Kapoor

Babbi Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ram Karan @ Guddi and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Chandan Dabra and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Jasmeet Singh Gill & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Avtar Singh Vs State of Pb and Anr.