Allowed

Sandeep Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Feb 2017CRM-M/28105/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed FIR and all subsequent proceedings for offences under various IPC sections after parties reached a genuine, voluntary compromise. Court found continuation of prosecution futile as conviction chances were bleak.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.254 dated 23.10.2008 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners.

Sandeep Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

Date of decision:15.2.2017

¶2

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶3

Criminal Misc. No.M-28105 of 2016

¶4

.....

¶5

Sandeep Singh alias Saleda and others

¶6

.....Petitioners

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh

¶11

.....

¶12

Present: Ms. Arti Kataria, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶14

None for the 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.254 dated 23.10.2008 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 325, 326, 324, 323, 148, 149 and 34 IPC at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

¶17

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantRahat Bhagat on the allegations that the accused-petitioners attacked him and inflicted injuries. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

¶18

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a

¶19

Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.02.16 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

Cr. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2016

¶21

[2]

¶22

compromise, 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, Amritsar, has sent his report dated 3.10.2016 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is

¶23

genuine one.

¶24

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submits 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.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and have gone through the record.

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.02.16 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶29

Cr. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2016

¶30

[3]

¶31

petition is allowed and FIR No.254 dated 23.10.2008 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 325, 326, 324, 323, 148, 149 and 34 IPC at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

¶32

February 15, 2017. (Inderjit Singh) Judge hsp NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No

¶33

Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.02.16 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Sandeep Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh Vs State of Punjab

Kavita Joshi Vs State of Punjab

Jasveer Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Amrinder Singh Vs Prem Deep Sadhrao

Satish Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sandeep Kaur @ Sandaldeep Kaur Vs State of Punjab