Gurpreet Singh @ Bita & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 15 Jul 2011
- Bench
- AJAY TEWARI
Outcome
Allowed
Consequently, these petitions are allowed and the F
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 326
Judgment
Operative part
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. Tribhuvan Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Gill, D.A.G., Punjab. Ms. Ritu Punj, Advocate for the respondent No.2-complainant. CRM No.M-1363 of 2011 -2- AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of two cross cases FIRs on the basis of compromise. CRM-M No.1363 of 2011 has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the F.I.R. No.70 dated 20.07.2007 registered under Sections 307, 323, 326, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Dhanaula, District Barnala and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. CRM-M No.1376 of 2011 has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the F.I.R. No.70 dated 20.07.2007 registered under Sections 307, 325, 323, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Dhanaula, District Barnala and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. By order dated 18.01.2011 the parties were directed to be present before the trial Court for recording their statements regarding the compromise and trial Court was directed to send its report. The said report has been received whereby the factum of compromise has been confirmed. Learned Deputy Advocate General on instructions from Head Constable Manjit Singh has also confirmed the fact that the parties have entered into compromise. CRM No.M-1363 of 2011 -3- Broad guidelines have been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2007(3) R.C.R. (Crl.) 1052 for quashing the prosecution when parties entered into compromise. Consequently, these petitions are allowed and the F.I.R. No.70 dated 20.07.2007 and all other subsequent proceedings are quashed. July 15, 2011 ashish ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Consequently, these petitions are allowed and the F
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 326.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 15 Jul 2011. The bench was AJAY TEWARI.
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.