Allowed

Parshotam Lal & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Feb 2014CRM-M/23501/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR registered for offences including assault and criminal intimidation. Relying on a prior Full Bench decision, the Court held that non-compoundable offences can be quashed if a voluntary compromise restores harmony and the offence is not heinous.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR No.102 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

Parshotam Lal & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-23501 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: February 21, 2014

¶3

Parshotam Lal and another

¶4

Vs.

¶5

State of Punjab and another

¶6

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta

¶7

Present: Mr. Manoj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Sharma, AAG, Punjab. Complainant in person with Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate.

¶8

Surinder Gupta, J

¶9

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of the FIR No.102 dated 12.6.2012 (Annexure P-1), registered for offence under Sections 323, 324,325, 506 read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station Sadar Amritsar, District Amritsar, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).

¶10

As per case of the prosecution, on 17.3.2012 at about 2.00 p.m. the petitioners armed with deadly weapons caused injuries to the complainant.

¶11

Upon notice, Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State and the respondent No.2-complainant has appeared in person.

¶12

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

¶13

The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 17.2.2014 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

¶14

The complainant, who is present in person, has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P/1) is quashed. Learned State counsel has also not disputed the compromise (Annexure P/2).

¶15

Kumar Deepak 2014.02.25 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

-2-

¶17

Crl. Misc. No. M-23501 of 2013 (O&M)

¶18

The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for quashing the impugned FIR is that the offence under Section 324 IPC is not compoundable. In case Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 , Full Bench of this Court has held that the FIR can be quashed on the basis of the compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even if the offence is not compoundable.

¶19

In the instant case, the compromise has been effected with the intervention of the respectables and now the parties wish to live in peace and harmony.

¶20

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties to this petition but also for their families and ultimately the society at large. The offence in this case is not so heinous or serious that it cannot be settled by the parties through compromise.

¶21

In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is quashed.

¶22

February 21, 2014 (Surinder Gupta) deepak Judge

¶23

Kumar Deepak 2014.02.25 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parshotam Lal & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parshotam Lal & Ors. v. State of Punjab & 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

Roshini Vs State of Haryana

Inder Mohan Singh Bains & Anrsq Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Mandeep Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kulwinder Singh @ Raja Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

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