Quashed

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

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Sept 2013CRM-M/18953/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed FIR No. 83 alleging forgery and criminal conspiracy following a verified compromise dated 4.4.2013 between the complainants and petitioners, finding no useful purpose in continuing criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 83 dated 26.5.2010 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners were quashed.

Manjit Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

[ 1 ]

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-18953 of 2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-18953 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: Sept. 27,2013

¶5

Manjit Singh and others ............................ Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and others.................. Respondents

¶8

Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri

¶9

1.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶10

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶11

Present: Mr. M.J.S.Bedi, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Daljeet Singh Virk, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 6.

¶14

RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)

¶15

Quashing of FIR No. 83 dated 26.5.2010 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station City Moga, District Moga (Annexure P1) is being sought on the basis of compromise dated 4.4.2013 (Annexure P-2).

¶16

The FIR has been recorded on the statement made by Kashmir Singh alleging that complainants are the owners Kaur Rupinderof the land comprising in Khasra No. 163//5/37, 103 to 110 2013.09.30 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

Crl. Misc. No. M-18953 of 2013 (O&M) [ 2 ]

¶18

situated at village Ghal Kalan Tehsil and District Moga. Manjit Singh executed a sale deed in the name of his brother Kuldip Singh, Brij Mohan Singh, Sewak Singh @ Gursewak Singh and Lakha Singh as per mutation No.9828. The said land was sold by Manjit Singh being attorney of the complainants. The allegation is that this power of attorney dated 21.10.2008 was forged and had never been issued by the complainant Sewak Singh @ Gursewak Singh. Moreover, Brij Mohan and Lakha Singh were not seen anywhere in the photograph taken with Tehsildar executing the power of attorney. It is alleged that all the above said persons in connivance with the Revenue Department had prepared a false and forged General Power of Attorney for the purpose of embezzling the land of the complainants.

¶19

After registration of the FIR, challan was presented and during the pendency of the trial a compromise was effected between the parties on 4.4.2013 (Annexure P2).

¶20

In compliance of the order dated 31.5.2013, status report dated 19.7.2013 has been filed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Moga. 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 Ex.C1. The complainant also stated that he has no objection if the FIR in the present case is quashed and that he shall withdraw the civil suit filed in the Court of Civil

¶21

Kaur Rupinder 2013.09.30 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶22

Crl. Misc. No. M-18953 of 2013 (O&M) [ 3 ] Judge (Sr. Divn.), Moga. The Statement of Manjeet Singh, Devinder Singh, Jagjit Singh, Taljinder Singh, Harjit Singh, Gurmandeep Singh, Sukhjit Kaur and Lakha Singh has also been recorded to the same effect.

¶23

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.

¶24

Consequently, in view of the above circumstances and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manoj Sharma v. State and others 2008(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 827 FIR No. 83 dated 26.5.2010 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station City Moga, District Moga (Annexure P1) is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners.

¶25

Petition is disposed of.

¶26

27.9.2013 Rupi

¶27

( RITU BAHRI ) JUDGE

¶28

Kaur Rupinder 2013.09.30 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siri Bhagwan and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of Haryana

Sohan Singh Vs Jig Singh and Ors.

Phool Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Ram Nath & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Rajnish Wadehra and Anr. Vs M/S R.S.V. Enterprises