Allowed

Ajay Kumar Sood Alias Ajay Kumar and Other v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Dec 2024CRM-M/36121/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners accused in an FIR under Sections 420, 120-B IPC and Punjab Gambling Act sought quashing on grounds of compromise with complainant Nanak Singh. Following the Magistrate's report confirming a voluntary compromise, the High Court quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings qua the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.82 dated 12.12.2023 and subsequent proceedings quashed qua petitioners

Ajay Kumar Sood Alias Ajay Kumar and Other Vs… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

CRM-M-36121-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 02.12.2024

¶3

Ajay Kumar Sood alias Ajay Kumar and others … Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Punjab and another

¶6

... Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶8

Present:Mr. Abdul Aziz, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab.

¶9

Mr. Rupender Singh Rana, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶10

¶11

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶12

Petitioners-Ajay Kumar Sood alias Ajay Kumar, Krishan Gopal Sood @ Monu Sood, Kulwant Singh, Saraj Mohd. have approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.82, dated 12.12.2023, Police Station Sandaur, District Malerkotla, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, Sections 13-A/3/67 of Punjab Gambling Act, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the parties.

¶13

Vide order dated 30.07.2024, 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.

¶14

MOHAN SINGH 2024.12.04 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶15

CRM-M-36121-2024 (O&M) - 2 -

¶16

Report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Malerkotla, has been received, wherein it has been reported that the statement of petitioners/accused Ajay Kumar Sood alias Ajay Kumar, Krishan Gopal Sood @ Monu Sood, Kulwant Singh, Saraj Mohd. and complainant Nanak Singh @ Nanak Singh have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter amongst themselves.

¶17

Complainant Nanak Singh @ Nanak Singh in his statement had stated that he has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

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.82, dated 12.12.2023, Police Station Sandaur, District Malerkotla, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, Sections 13-A/3/67 of Punjab Gambling Act, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

¶20

02.12.2024 mohan		(GURVIN	DER SINGH GILL) JUDGE
	Whether speaking /reasoned	Yes / No
	Whether Reportable	Yes / No

¶21

MOHAN SINGH 2024.12.04 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Ajay Kumar Sood Alias Ajay Kumar and Other v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Sood Alias Ajay Kumar and Other 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

Arvind Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Brij Bhushan Alias Brijesh Vs State of Haryana

Sandeep Vs State of Haryana

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sunil Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Bagich Singh Alias Mandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab