Narinderpal Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Narinderpal Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 3 May, 2024

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061557




                                            Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:061557
259
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M No. 25954 of 2023 (O&M)
                                          Date of Decision: 03.05.2024

Narinderpal Singh and another

                                                               .......... Petitioners
                                        Versus

State of Punjab and another
                                                             .......... Respondents

CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:      Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate,
              for the petitioners.

              Mr. Siddharath Sandhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
              for respondent No. 1.

              Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate
              for respondent No. 2.

                                ****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners, by way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seek quashing of FIR No. 62 dated 18.04.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406 & 120-B of IPC (Section 411 of IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar, alongwith all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated 12.05.2023 (Annexure P-2).

[2] This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 22.05.2023, directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the validity of compromise.

[3] In pursuance of above order dated 22.05.2023, a report dated 30.05.2023 has been received from the concerned Court, stating that the 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 00:26:34 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061557 CRM-M No. 25954 of 2023 (O&M) -2- compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. No accused has been declared as proclaimed offender. [4] Once, the compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 having no objection as regards quashing of FIR as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioners; there does not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR qua the petitioners. Even otherwise, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the present circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

[5] The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in future, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, no cause remains for the Trial Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating this FIR. The compromise in question is even found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in the case(s) of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543.

[6] Further, learned counsel for the petitioners, while placing reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jayrajsingh Digvijaysinh Rana Versus State of Gujarat and another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in the case(s) of Joginder Singh & another Versus State of Punjab and another, passed in CRM-M No.23739 of 2010 decided on 27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Versus 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 00:26:35 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:061557 CRM-M No. 25954 of 2023 (O&M) -3- State of Punjab & another, passed in CRM-M No.37395 of 2016 decided on 16.05.2017 and Vimal Kalra & others Versus State of Punjab & another, passed in CRM-M No.20355 of 2022, decided on 25.07.2022 submits that partial quashing of the FIR is possible on the basis of a compromise.

[7] Moreover, learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from their clients, submits that the petitioners volunteer to serve public cause by providing the medical equipment to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar. [8] Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts, accompanied by statements of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments, the FIR (supra) as well as all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. [9] Accordingly, petition stands allowed, however, subject to providing equipment viz. stretcher and wheelchair to the Civil Hospital, Jalandhar, amounting to Rs. 20,000/-, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, as volunteered by the petitioners, against due receipt issued by the concerned Civil Surgeon, who shall prepare an inventory in this regard for its regular inspection by the Director concerned. A copy of the receipt shall also be sent to the office of Advocate General, Punjab at the earliest for maintaining records in this regard.

May 03, 2024                                           ( HARKESH MANUJA )
'dk kamra'                                                  JUDGE

             Whether Speaking/reasoned                  Yes/No

             Whether Reportable                         Yes/No




                                  3 of 3
               ::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 00:26:35 :::