Allowed

Sunil Mahajan @ Bagga and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2024CRM-M/15163/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of FIR No.43 dated 9.3.2021 under IPC sections for hurt and related offences based on a compromise with complainants. The Magistrate reported voluntary compromise. Relying on Kulwinder Singh (Full Bench), the High Court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings qua petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.43 dated 9.3.2021 and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom quashed qua petitioners.

Sunil Mahajan @ Bagga and Others Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

CRM-M-15163-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:-5.12.2024

¶3

Sunil Mahajan @ Baggga and others … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ... Respondents

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶5

Present: Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Mann, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶6

Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

¶7

Mr. Hardeep Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 5.

¶8

¶9

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶10

The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.43, dated 9.3.2021 registered at Police Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar, under Sections 323, 324, 506, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, wherein offences under Sections 325, 34, 201 IPC were added and offence under Sections 506, 148 and 149 IPC were deleted later on, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise stated to have been effected between the parties.

¶11

Vide order dated 22.3.2024, the parties had been directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate so as to get their statements recorded qua the factum of compromise.

¶12

Pankaj Kakkar 2024.12.05 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

¶13

CRM-M-15163-2024 (O&M)

¶14

( 2 )

¶15

Report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Nakodar has been received, wherein it has been reported that joint statement of petitioners/accused No.1 to 4 namely Sunil Mahajan @ Baggga, Anmol Mahajan, Ankur Mahajan, Rishu Mahajan @ Laddi Mahajan and separate statement of petitioner/accused No.5 namely Hari Krishan and also separate statements of respondents No.2 to 5 namely Prithvi, Tarun Kumar, Kirandeep Kaur, Tanush Kalra have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter amongst themselves.

¶16

Respondents No.2 to 5 namely Prithvi, Tarun Kumar, Kirandeep Kaur, Tanush Kalra in their statements have stated that they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶17

Learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Nakodar has specifically opined that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily and without any undue influence.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid compromise and bearing in mind the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab , the present petition is allowed and FIR No.43, dated 9.3.2021 registered at Police Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar, under Sections 323, 324, 506, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, wherein offences under Sections 325, 34, 201 IPC were added and offence under Sections 506, 148 and 149 IPC were deleted later on and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners.

¶19

5.12.2024		( Gurvinder Singh Gill )
Pankaj		Judge
	Whether reasoned/speaking	Yes / No
	Whether reportable	Yes / No

¶20

Pankaj Kakkar 2024.12.05 17:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

Sunil Mahajan @ Bagga and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Mahajan @ Bagga and Others 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

Amritpal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Bittu Vs State of Punjab

Kuldeep and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Prithvi and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Mohd. Shazeb Abid Vs State of Punjab

Tarandeep Kaur and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another