Allowed

Jaggi @ Jagdeep Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Apr 2024CRM-M/6861/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Theft FIR quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties, verified as genuine and voluntary by the trial Court, subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to a charitable society.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.0234 dated 10.11.2023 under Section 379 IPC at P.S. Machhiwara and all consequential proceedings quashed, subject to payment of Rs.10,000 costs within two weeks.

Jaggi @ Jagdeep Singh and Others Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

294 2024:PHHC:055096 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-6861-2024 Date of Decision: April 23, 2024

¶3

JAGGI @ JAGDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS ........Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ........Respondents

¶4

........Respondents

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

¶6

Present: Mr. Anna Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. Mr. J.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶8

¶9

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

¶10

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners pray for quashing of case bearing FIR No.0234 dated 10.11.2023 registered under Section 379 IPC at P.S. Machhiwara, District Khanna, along with all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated 14.11.2023.

¶11

As per allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioners stole the paddy crop from the agricultural field of the complainant and sold the same in Mandi.

¶12

This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 05.03.2024 directed the parties to appear before trial Court for getting their statements recorded as regards the veracity of the compromise arrived at between them.

¶13

In pursuance to the order dated 05.03.2024, a report dated 22.03.2024 has been received from the concerned Court, stating that the compromise in the present case is genuine and voluntary.

¶14

TEJWINDER SINGH 2024.04.25 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

CRM-M-6861-2024 -2-

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that once, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 has no objection as regards quashing of FIR as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioners; the dispute purely personal in nature, there does not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR. He also submits that even, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶17

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that allegations in the present FIR are of serious nature and he opposes the prayer made in the petition.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records including the report dated 22.03.2024. The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in future, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, no cause remains for the trial Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating this FIR. The compromise in question is even found to be fully in consonance with the directions issued by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543 ”.

¶19

TEJWINDER SINGH 2024.04.25 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-6861-2024 -3-

¶21

Thus, in view of the aforesaid report, accompanied by statements of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 0234 dated 10.11.2023 registered under Section 379 IPC at P.S. Machhiwara, District Khanna along with all consequential proceeding arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.

¶22

The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment of Costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with Lala Jagat Narayan Nishkam Sewa Society, Ludhiana, within a period of two weeks from today.

¶23

23.04.2024

¶24

Tejwinder

¶25

( Whether speaking/reasoned	HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶26

TEJWINDER SINGH 2024.04.25 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jaggi @ Jagdeep Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaggi @ Jagdeep Singh and Others 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

Pawan Alias Pona Vs State of Haryana

Satbir Singh Gill Vs State of Haryana

Sushil Kumar Saini Vs State of Haryana

Ricky Vs State of Punjab

Khushi Mohammad Alias Aman Rajpoot Vs State of Haryana

Arman Vs State of Haryana