Allowed

Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Oct 2013CRM-M/28188/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR regarding robbery and hurt. Despite the charges being non-compoundable, the court exercised its jurisdiction based on the fact that the dispute had been amicably settled and the case property returned, relying on the principle of harmonious relations and a Full Bench precedent.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 178 dated 08.08.2008 and all consequential proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.

Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky & Anr. Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM M-28188 of 2013

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-28188 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 21, 2013.

¶5

Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky and another

¶6

.......PETITIONER(s).

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.....RESPONDENT(s).

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. Suveer Sheokand, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

¶12

Mr. Ashish Sanghi, D.A.G., Punjab.

¶13

Respondent No.2 in person with Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocate.

¶14

¶15

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶16

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.178 dated 08.08.2008 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 382, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Model Town District Ludhiana, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2), having been entered between the parties.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

¶18

through the record.

¶19

It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that

¶20

Mehta Sachin 2013.10.22 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶21

CRM M-28188 of 2013

¶22

- 2 -

¶23

dispute between the parties has since been settled and that the case property i.e. car had already been returned to respondent No.2 in the year 2008 as the matter has been amicably settled due to intervention of respectable persons and relatives from both the sides.

¶24

Respondent No.2 – complainant also appeared in person with his counsel and filed short reply by way of affidavit admitting the factum of compromise and stating that he is having no objection if the FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed.

¶25

In appropriate cases FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab , 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 .

¶26

In the interest of harmonious relations between the parties, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 178 dated 08.08.2008 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 382, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Model Town District Ludhiana alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioners Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky and Rajdeep Singh is, hereby, quashed.

¶27

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) October 21, 2013. JUDGE Sachin M.

¶28

Mehta Sachin 2013.10.22 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narinder Pal Singh @ Lucky & 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

Gurdarshan Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Parveen Vs State of Haryana

Deepak Khullar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Boota Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Dharmender Vs State of Haryana

Siddharth Balyan Vs State of Haryana and Anr.