Allowed

Joban Sidhu and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Sept 2020CRM-M/19707/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court quashed an FIR registered under cheating and forgery sections and all subsequent proceedings. The petition, filed under Section 482 CrPC, was allowed as the dispute was amicably settled with a genuine compromise, making further prosecution futile.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.0247 dated 05.08.2018 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioners.

Joban Sidhu and Another Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

CRM-M No.19707 of 2019 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.19707 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision.17.09.2020 (Heard through VC)

¶5

Joban Sidhu and another ...Petitioners

¶6

¶7

State of Punjab and another

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶10

Present: Mr. S.P.S. Chakkal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Ms. Rashmi Attri, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. S.S. Sarwara, Advocate for the complainant.

¶13

-.-

¶14

JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL)

¶15

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.0247 dated 05.08.2018 registered under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B IPC Police Station City Rajpura, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 20.03.2019 (Annexure P- 2 ).

¶16

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainanton the allegations of harrasment at the hands of accused-petitioners and for preparing false and forged documents by them. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

¶17

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

¶18

PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.09.18 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

-2-

¶20

CRM-M No.19707 of 2019 (O&M)

¶21

compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajpura stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

¶22

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and the counsel for the State 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.

¶23

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

¶24

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a 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.

¶25

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.0247 dated 05.08.2018 registered under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B IPC Police

¶26

PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.09.18 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

-3-

¶28

CRM-M No.19707 of 2019 (O&M)

¶29

Station City Rajpura, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.

¶30

(JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE

¶31

September 17, 2020 Pankaj*

¶32

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶33

PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.09.18 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Joban Sidhu and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joban Sidhu and Another 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

Punjab State Warehousing Corporation Vs B.K Chadha

Suman Lata Vs State of Haryana

Parvesh Vs State of Haryana

Raj Rani Vs State of Haryana and Others

Saleem Khan Vs State of Punjab

Ajay Vs State of Haryana