Allowed

Kulwinder Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Nov 2021CRM-M/3268/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This high court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of an FIR due to a genuine compromise between the parties arising from alleged offences under the IPC. Relying on Narinder Singh vs State of Punjab, the court held that prosecution would be futile as no party would lose in a compromise.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.196 dated 09.07.2020 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioners.

Kulwinder Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M No.3268 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.3268 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:17.11.2021

¶5

Kulwinder Kaur and others

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶11

Present:Mr. Vikasdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Ms. Rashmi Attri, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Nagar Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 5.

¶14

-.-

¶15

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL)

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.196 dated 09.07.2020 registered under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506, 148, 149 Indian Penal Code (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 09.09.2020 (Annexure P-2 ). 2. The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant on the allegations that the accused-petitioners entered into his house and caused injuries to him and his family members. 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 compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa

¶18

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.11.18 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

-2-

¶20

CRM-M No.3268 of 2021

¶21

Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from SDJM, Sultanpur Lodhi 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 Assistant Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-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.196 dated

¶26

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.11.18 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

-3-

¶28

CRM-M No.3268 of 2021

¶29

09.07.2020 registered under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506, 148, 149 Indian Penal Code (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.

¶30

November 17, 2021 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Pankaj* JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶31

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.11.18 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kulwinder Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwinder Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Kunday Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Rakesh Kumar @ Border Vs State of Haryana and Others

Karanpreet Singh @ Fateh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jasbir Kaur and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Sukhdev Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kulwant Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another