Dismissed

Ramandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2015CRM-M/14242/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of a complaint and setting aside a conviction based on a compromise. The High Court, noting that the appeal was pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, declined to exercise its own jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC, directing the petitioner to approach the lower appellate court.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing and setting aside the judgment dismissed; petitioner directed to approach the lower appellate court.

Ramandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

CRM-M 14242/2015

¶2

117

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Date of decision:24.09.2015.

¶5

Ramandeep Singh

¶6

.............Petitioner

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.............Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr.HS Jalal,Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Kirat Singh Sidhu,Deputy Advocate General for State of Punjab with HC Pala Singh Mr.KBS Mann,Advocate for respondent no.2/complainant

¶12

Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)

¶13

The prayer is for quashing of the complaint no.164-1 dated 19.9.2007(Annexure P-1) and also for setting aside the judgment dated 4.2.2014 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gidderbaha (Annexure P-2) of the conviction based on a compromise (Annexure P-3) during the pendency of appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib.

¶14

In support, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Division bench of this Court reported as Sube Singh and another v State of Haryana and another , 2013(4) RCR (Criminal)102.

¶15

Learned counsel for the complainant has admitted the fact

¶16

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.09.24 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

¶17

CRM-M 14242/2015

¶18

117

¶19

of compromise and has no objection if the prayer on behalf of the petitioner is granted.

¶20

Learned State counsel states that since proceedings are pending before the first Appellate Court, this Court should restrain itself from exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC. The factum of compromise can be evaluated by lower Appellate Court.

¶21

After hearing counsel for the parties this Court is persuaded to accept the argument on behalf of the learned State counsel.

¶22

In the light of proceedings pending before the lower Appellate Court, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to approach the lower Appellate Court and apprise it regarding the compromise between the parties, who shall thereupon decide the matter in accordance with law.

¶23

Disposed of in the above terms.

¶24

24.09.2015. joshi

¶25

(Jaswant Singh) Judge

¶26

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.09.24 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

Ramandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and 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

Tara Singh Vs State of Punjab

Avtar Singh @ Tarri Vs State of Haryana

Vicky Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Amandeep Gujral Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sandeep and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Satyawan Vs State of Haryana