Allowed

Pardeep and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Sept 2024CRM-M/18352/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of an FIR for offences under Sections 387 and 506 IPC on the basis of a compromise. Following the trial court's report confirming a voluntary settlement between accused and complainant, the High Court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings qua the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.08 dated 08.01.2022, Police Station Titram, District Kaithal, under Sections 387, 506 IPC and subsequent proceedings quashed qua petitioners.

Pardeep and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

CRM-M-18352-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 17.09.2024

¶3

Pardeep and another … Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Haryana and others

¶6

... Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶8

Present:Ms. Shivani Jaglan, Advocate for Ms. Aashna Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶9

Mr. Neeraj Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

¶10

None for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶11

¶12

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶13

Petitioners-Pardeep and Kuldeep have approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.08, dated 08.01.2022, Police Station Titram, District Kaithal, under Sections 387, 506 IPC, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the parties.

¶14

Vide order dated 16.04.2024, 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.

¶15

MOHAN SINGH 2024.09.17 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶16

CRM-M-18352-2024 (O&M) - 2 -

¶17

Report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Kaithal, has been received, wherein it has been reported that the statement of petitioners/accused Pardeep, Kuldeep and complainant/victim Harish Chander and Dikshit Garg have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter amongst themselves.

¶18

Complainant/victim Harish Chander and Dikshit Garg in their statement had stated that they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶19

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Kaithal, has specifically opined that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence.

¶20

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.08, dated 08.01.2022, Police Station Titram, District Kaithal, under Sections 387, 506 IPC and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

¶21

17.09.2024 mohan		(GURVIN	DER SINGH GILL) JUDGE
	Whether speaking /reasoned	Yes / No
	Whether Reportable	Yes / No

¶22

MOHAN SINGH 2024.09.17 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Pardeep and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pardeep and Another v. State of Haryana 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

Inder and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

M/S Satyam Organic Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Sanjeev Kumar

Jagsir @ Pala Vs State of Haryana

Vijay Kumar Alias Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs State of Punjab

Prince Alias Anda Vs State of Haryana