Criminal Misc. No. M-19872 of 2011 (O&M) v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 13 Sep 2011
- Bench
- NAWAB SINGH
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 427, 447, 506
Judgment
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjiv K. Virk, Advocate, for respondent No.2. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed seeking quashing of First Information Report (for short 'FIR) No.10 dated January 22nd, 2011 registered under Sections 427, 447 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station Kapurthala, District Kapurthala. It has been pleaded that the parties have compromised the matter vide compromise-deed (Annexure P-2). The parties have stated that there is no ill-will left and they want to live in peace and harmony in future. Indeed, the offences, for which the petitioners are facing trial, are non-compoundable. Notwithstanding that, there can not be any embargo in allowing the parties to compromise the matter in view of the law laid down by the Five Judge Bench's decision of this Court rendered in Kulwinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. In view of above, petition is accepted. Consequently, FIR No.10 dated January 22nd, 2011 registered under Sections 427, 447 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC in Police Station Kapurthala, District Kapurthala and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.
13.9.2011. SN (NAWAB SINGH) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 427, 447, 506.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 13 Sep 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.