Quashed

Ashok Kumar Mittal & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Jan 2015CRM-M/16242/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR registered under various IPC sections against the petitioners. The court relied on the voluntary compromise dated 18.02.2014 and the complainant's statement indicating no further objection to the petitioners. Exception was made regarding petitioner No. 4 who did not appear.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 241 dated 09.08.2009 under Sections 147/149/323/354/380/452/448/506 IPC is quashed with consequential proceedings qua all petitioners except petitioner No. 4.

Ashok Kumar Mittal & Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-16242 of 2014 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

¶4

AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

Crl. Misc. No. M-16242 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.01.2015

¶6

Ashok Kumar Mittal and others

¶7

....Petitionerss

¶8

versus

¶9

State of U.T. Chd. and another

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶12

Present: Ms. Amarjit Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. D.S. Nigah, Advocate for the petitioners

¶13

Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for U.T. Chandigarh

¶14

¶15

RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)

¶16

Quashing of FIR No. 241 dated 09.08.2009 under Sections 147/149/323/354/380//452/448/506 registered at P.S. Sector 17, Chadigarh, is being sought on the basis of compromise dated 18.02.2014 (Annexure P-2).

¶17

F.I.R has been registered on the statement of respondent No. 2 against the petitioners with the allegations that on 05.08.2009, when the complainant was in Delhi, she got a call that the light of her house is open then she came to Chandigarh along with his brother Vinod and after reaching the house, they saw that the locks were broken and 7-8 persons have trespassed in the house. When the complainant asked his brother-in-laws about the trespass, they started giving abuses and used filthy languages and told her to left the spot otherwise, they will kill her. In the meantime, 3-4 boys came from inside the house and started giving thrash and fist blows. On raising hue and cry, the nearby people came at the spot, who rescued the complainant from their hands.

¶18

This Court received the status report dated 23.08.2014 and

¶19

GAURAV 2015.01.29 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

-2-

¶21

Crl. Misc. No. M-16242 of 2014 (O&M)

¶22

statements of all the parties have been recorded with regard to factum of compromise except Ravi Kumar-petitioner No 4. This Court vide order dated 27.08.2014 directed petitioner No. 4 to appear before the trial Court and submit his bail bonds, which shall be accepted by the trial Court but today again a status report dated 28.10.2014 has been received to the effect that petitioner No. 4 has not put in appearance.

¶23

As per report of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class Chandigarh, statement of complainant-Sushma Mittal has been recorded to the effect that she had compromised the matter with the accused persons and has no grudge against them. She has no objection, if the present F.I.R be quashed against the petitioners. Joint Statement of petitioners-Ashok Kumar Mittal, Amit Kumar, Tinku, Ranjit Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Kuldeep Singh, Sonu, Sumer, Jitender Rana and Jatinder Kumar has been recorded to the same effect. Both the parties were identified by the respective counsels. The compromise has been entered voluntarily and without any pressure.

¶24

Consequently, in view of the status report and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

¶25

Accordingly, FIR No. 241 dated 09.08.2009 under Sections 147/149/323/354/380//452/448/506 registered at P.S. Sector 17, Chadigarh, are quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners except petitioner No. 4-Ravi Kumar.

¶26

The petition stands disposed of.

¶27

(RITU BAHRI) GAURAV JUDGE 2015.01.29 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

27.01.2015 G Arora

Ashok Kumar Mittal & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Mittal & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Anr.

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

M/S Amrit Agrovet Pvt. Ltd. Vs Narender Kumar

Sukhwinder Singh @ Bunty Vs State of Punjab

Amrinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Rupinder Singh @Pinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Ramanbir Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Bhushan Kumar Vs State of Punjab