单传诚法官拒绝了在Ludhiana District注册的FIR No.232相关的GD No.34，该FIR针对Parwinder Singh因暴力袭击和恐嚇而提出。考虑到各方之间达成的真实妥协以及穷人的起诉，法院认为继续程序将构成对司法程序的滥用，因此作出了有利于申诉人的判决。
DJ No.34及相关所有后续程序被撤销
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-14633-2022 Date of Decision:- 14.12.2022
PARWINDER SINGH ALIAS PINDA AND ANR
… Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
... Respondents
-.-
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
-.-
Present:Mr. G.S. Jagpal, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Sukhanpreet Kaur Rangi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
-.-
KARAMJIT SINGH, J . (Oral)
Present petition is for quashing of GD No.34 dated 21.8.2019 under Sections 323, 324, 506, 341, 34 IPC at Police Station Jamalpur District Ludhiana in FIR No.232 dated 18.8.2019 registered under Sections 323, 324, 506, 341, 34, 201 IPC at Police Station Jamalpur, District Ludhiana on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) along with other consequential proceedings arising thereto.
The abovesaid FIR was registered on the statement of complainant/respondent No.2-Satinder Pal Singh @ Prince against the petitioners.
GAURAV SOROT 2022.12.16 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order, judgment and documents.
( 2 ) CRM-M-14633-2022
On notice of motion, respondent No.2 appeared in the Court through his counsel and pleaded that he has no objection if the FIR in this case is quashed on the basis of the aforesaid compromise which has been effected between the parties.
During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was directed to record the statements of the all the concerned parties with regard to genuineness and validity or otherwise of the aforesaid compromise.
In compliance thereof, report from the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana along with statements of the parties has been received, in which, it is mentioned that the compromise is genuine and there was no undue influence or coercion from any side.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in view of the settlement effected between the parties, the present petition deserves to be accepted. It has also come on record that the aforesaid compromise is genuine and the parties effected the same without any undue influence or coercion.
I am of the view that the aforesaid compromise is in the welfare and interest of the parties and will enable the parties to live in peace and enjoy their life in a dignified manner. Also there is no legal impediment in translating their wishes into reality by putting an end to the criminal prosecution initiated on the basis of FIR in question. Further as the matter
GAURAV SOROT 2022.12.16 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order, judgment and documents.
( 3 ) CRM-M-14633-2022
has been compromised, the continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court.
For the reasons aforestated and having regard to the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Five Judges Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , this petition is allowed and GD No.34 dated 21.8.2019 under Sections 323, 324, 506, 341, 34 IPC at Police Station Jamalpur District Ludhiana in FIR No.232 dated 18.8.2019 registered under Sections 323, 324, 506, 341, 34, 201 IPC at Police Station Jamalpur, District Ludhiana on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) and all the subsequent proceedings thereof are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
14.12.2022 Gaurav Sorot
( KARAMJIT SINGH) JUDGE
Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No
GAURAV SOROT 2022.12.16 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order, judgment and documents.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned general diary and subsequent proceedings be quashed in view of the genuine compromise between the parties.
Whether the continuation of criminal prosecution would amount to abuse of process of court given the settlement.
Whether the compromise satisfies the requirements for quashing under Section 482 CrPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and anotherRelied on¶28
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anotherRelied on¶28
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052
Parwinder Singh alias Pinda and Anr
State of Punjab and Another
Karamjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
