Allowed

Gursewak Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Dec 2017CRM-M/18639/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR involving cheating and forgery charges, holding that an amicable, voluntary compromise between parties rendered continuance of prosecution an exercise in futility.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.69 dated 25.7.2015 and all subsequent proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.

Gursewak Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No.M-18639 of 2017

¶3

.....

¶4

Date of decision:20.12.2017

¶5

Gursewak Singh and others

¶6

.....Petitioners

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh

¶11

.....

¶12

Present: Mr. D.K. Praja Pati, Advocate for Mr. Sahil Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Ms. Simranjeet Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶14

Mr. Yogesh Goyal, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2.

¶15

Inderjit Singh, J.

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.69 dated 25.7.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Baretta, District Mansa and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

¶17

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantJangeer Kaur on the allegations that the accused-petitioners by hatching conspiracy have cheated her. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably settled and compromise has been Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.12.21 10:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

Cr. Misc. No.M-18639 of 2017

¶19

[2]

¶20

entered into between the parties, therefore, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Budhlada has sent report dated 13.12.2017 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

¶21

Ms. Simranjeet Kaur, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

¶23

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

¶24

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this

¶25

Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.12.21 10:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶26

Cr. Misc. No.M-18639 of 2017

¶27

[3]

¶28

petition is allowed and FIR No.69 dated 25.7.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC at Police Station Baretta, District Mansa and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

¶29

December 20, 2017.

¶30

(Inderjit Singh) Judge

¶31

hsp NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No

¶32

Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.12.21 10:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Gursewak Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gursewak Singh and Ors. 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

Deepu @ Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Opinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Balbir Singh @ Mani @ Cheema Vs State of Haryana

Ranbir Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Baljit Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Manjit Singh Bawa Vs State of Punjab and Anr.