The High Court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings after finding that a genuine compromise had been struck between the accused and the victims, rendering further prosecution futile.
Quashed FIR No. 68 dated 12.8.2015 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Date of decision:10.3.2017
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-32207 of 2016
.....
Sehbaz Khan alias Shebaj Khan and another
.....Petitioners
v.
State of Punjab and others
.....Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.
None for the complainant-respondents No.2 and 3.
Inderjit Singh, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.68 dated 12.8.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 379-B, 506 and 341 IPC at Police Station CityII Malerkotla, District Sangrur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).
The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantMohd. Aslam alias Billu Kabaria on the allegations that the accusedpetitioners attacked him and respondent No.3 and took `9,000/- from his pocket and remaining along with Wasim alias Jhalla had taken out money from the pocket of Abdul Hamid alias Haji and ran away. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably
Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.03.15 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-32207 of 2016
[2]
compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.
Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a 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 Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla, has sent his report dated 15.2.2017 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.
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.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and have gone through the record.
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.
Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.03.15 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-32207 of 2016
[3]
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 petition is allowed and FIR No.68 dated 12.8.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 379-B, 506 and 341 IPC at Police Station City-II Malerkotla, District Sangrur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
March 10, 2017. (Inderjit Singh) Judge hsp NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No
Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.03.15 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR registered for offences of theft and intimidation can be quashed in view of a genuine compromise between the parties.
Whether continuance of criminal prosecution is an exercise in futility after the dispute has been amicably settled.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabFollowed¶29
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sehbaz Khan alias Shebaj Khan and another
State of Punjab
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
