Criminal Misc. No. M-10228 of 2010 (O&M) v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Quashed
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 420, 465, 467, 468, 471
Judgment
Operative part
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Karan Pathak, Advocate for Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Addl. A.G. Punjab, for respondent No.1 – State. Respondent No.2 in person with Mr. D.S. Brar, Advocate. NAWAB SINGH, J. (ORAL) By this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks quashing of First Information Report (for short 'FIR) No.93 dated July 27th, 2007 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') in Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1). Quashing has been sought on the ground that parties have compromised the matter. Compromise-deed (Annexure P-2) has been placed on record. Joginder Singh (respondent No.2) has stated at bar that he has no objection if the aforesaid FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Indeed, the dispute between the parties was of personal nature. In view of this, there should not be any impediment in allowing the parties to compromise the matter. Support to this view can be had from the authority 'Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab' 2008 (2) RCR Criminal Misc. No. M-10228 of 2010 (O&M) 2 (Criminal) 429, wherein, Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled that in such type of cases, where the dispute is of personal nature, Court should ordinarily, accept the compromise. In upshot, for the reasons recorded supra, the petition is accepted, FIR No.93 dated July 27th, 2007 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC in Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.
28.07.2011 (NAWAB SINGH) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 420, 465, 467, 468, 471.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 28 Jul 2011. The bench was NAWAB SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.