CRM-M No. 21176 of 2024 · Punjab And Haryana High Court · 2024
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Resultantly, FIR No.108 dated 09.07.2022 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Anaj Mandi, District Patiala (Anneuxre P-1), alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. S. SHEKHAWAT Present: Ms. Jyoti Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Sandep Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Deepinder Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Ms. Ramandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Navjot Narang, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** N. S. SHEKHAWAT, J. (Oral)
#1. The instant petition has been filed under Section under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of an FIR No.108 dated
09.07.2022 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Anaj Mandi, District Patiala (Anneuxre P-1), alongwith all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 22.04.2024 (Annexure P-2).
#2. Vide order dated 01.05.2024 while issuing notice of motion, by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with respect to the compromise dated 22.04.2024 (Annexure P-2).
#3. Pursuant to aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala and got their statements recorded. Report dated 17.07.2024 has been received whereby after recording the statements of MAMTA 2024.09.24 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CRM-M-21176-2024 -2- the parties, the Court below has shown its satisfaction that the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.
#5. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the case file. In the light of the satisfaction shown by the Court below and considering the offence for which the accused have been charged are not of serious nature, together with the fact that compromise will go a long way in ironing out the differences for betterment of future life of the parties and also in view of the law laid down in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the present petition for quashing the FIR is allowed qua the petitioners.
#6. Resultantly, FIR No.108 dated 09.07.2022 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Anaj Mandi, District Patiala (Anneuxre P-1), alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
19.09.2024 M.Sikka (N. S. SHEKHAWAT) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No MAMTA 2024.09.24 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 19 Sep 2024. The bench was N S SHEKHAWAT.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.