OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-41101-2024 Date of decision: October 28th & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 28 Oct 2024
- Bench
- MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this…
Judgment
Present: Mr. Mohit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Maan Akashdeep Singh, Advocate for Mr. J.S. Ghumman, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.160 dated 26.11.2019 under Sections 420, 120-B of the IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Navi Baradari, District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 05.03.2024 (Annexure P-2).
Vide order dated 28.08.2024 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on
27.09.2024 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.
PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.10.28 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Report has since been received from learned CRM-M-41101-2024 -2- Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, in pursuance of the directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondents have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.
The trial Court has annexed the copies of the statements of the parties, along with its report.
Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and private respondents are the only aggrieved persons in the FIR in question.
In view of the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.
Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. October 28th, 2024 Puneet (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.10.28 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 28 Oct 2024. The bench was MANJARI NEHRU KAUL.
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.