Gagandeep Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 15496 P&H

CRM-M-27796 of 2019                                             {1}


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH


266                                       CRM-M-27796 of 2019
                                          Date of decision:01.12.2022


Gagandeep Singh                                ... Petitioner

                           Vs.


State of Punjab and another                    ... Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present:-    Mr. Raman Kumar, Advocate for
             Mr. Rajeev K. Kapila, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. P.S.Grewal, DAG, Punjab.

             Ms. Kulwinder Kaur, Advocate for
             Ms. Suminder Deep Kaur, Advocate
             for respondent No.2.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.0260 dated 02.10.2018

registered for offences under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 506 of Indian Penal

Code, 1860, at Police Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar

(Annexure P-1), alongwith all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on

the basis of mutual compromise dated 12.06.2019 (Annexure P-2).

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and

complainant were residing in same premises and FIR (Annexure P-1), has

1 of 4

CRM-M-27796 of 2019 {2}

been registered due to some misunderstanding between the parties, which

has been cleared and matter has been settled, vide compromise (Annexure

P-2). He submits that the parties have appeared before the Trial Court in

compliance of the order passed by this Court and their statements in support

of the settlement, have been recorded.

Upon instructions, State counsel submits that final report has

been presented, charge has been framed, but no prosecution witness has

been examined.

Counsel representing the complainant-respondent No.2 has

supported the prayer made in the petition.

Heard counsel for the parties.

Vide order dated 27.11.2019, this Court directed the parties to

appear before the Trial Court/Area Magistrate/Duty Magistrate for getting

their statements recorded and a report was called for regarding genuineness

of the compromise, as also as to whether any party has been declared as

Proclaimed Offender. Report has been received and its relevant extract is as

under:-

"In compliance with the aforesaid order, parties

appeared on 16.12.2019 and complainant namely Akashdeep

Kaur @ Naju got recorded her statement stating that the FIR

has been registered on the basis of her statement against

accused namely Gagandeep Singh. Now, with the intervention

of respectables, she has compromised the matter with the

accused person. The said compromise is without any threat,

2 of 4

CRM-M-27796 of 2019 {3}

force and coercion. She has no objection if the present FIR

alongwith other consequential proceedings be quashed against

the above said accused person.

Similarly, petitioner-accused Gagandeep Singh has got

recorded his statement to the effect that the matter has been

compromised. The said compromise is without any threat,

force, coercion. The said FIR alongwith other consequential

proceedings may kindly be quashed against him.

ASI Avtar Singh got recorded his statement to the effect

that he is Investigating Officer of FIR No.260 dated

02.10.2018, under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 506 IPC, P.S.City

Kharar, District SAS Nagar, and there is only one accused

namely Gagandeep Singh and none of the accused person has

been declared proclaimed person by this Court nor any PO

proceedings are pending against him. This Court is satisfied

that aforesaid statements made by complainant and accused

are voluntarily and without any threat or any undue

influence."

An examination of the allegations and report shows that dispute

between the parties is purely personal in nature, which has been amicably

settled. This Court is of the view that settlement between the parties would

go long way in bringing peace and harmony..

In view of the above and the judgment of Supreme Court in

Shiji @ Pappu and others Versus Radhika and another 2012(1) RCR

3 of 4

CRM-M-27796 of 2019 {4}

(Criminal) 9, this Court is of the opinion that because of the settlement,

possibility of conviction of the accused is remote.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.0260 dated

02.10.2018 registered for offences under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 506 of

Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar

(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are

quashed qua the petitioner.

                                                      (SUVIR SEHGAL)
December 01, 2022                                         JUDGE
savita

Whether Speaking/Reasoned                                  Yes
Whether Reportable                                         Yes




                               4 of 4