Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jashandeep Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 20 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-37634-2022 (O & M)
Date of decision: 20.12.202022
Jashandeep Singh and ors. ...... Petitioners
V/s
State of Punjab and anr. ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Amritpal Singh Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Ms. Ramta Chaudhary, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. R.S. Punia, Advocate, for Mr. D.S. Virk, Advocate,
for respondent No.2-complainant.
*****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)
The prayer in this petition is for quashing of the FIR No.117
dated 06.06.2022 under Sections 307, 341, 323, 365, 511, 506, 148 and 149
IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act registered with Police Station City
Samana, District Patiala and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom
on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.
Vide order dated 25.08.2022 this Court had directed the parties
to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with
regard to the compromise (Annexure P-2) and the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial
Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as
enumerated in the said order.
Pursuant to the order dated 25.08.2022 passed by this Court
parties have appeared before the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Samana, and as per her report dated 23.11.2022 submitted to this Court, both
1 of 3
CRM-M-37634-2022 (O & M) ::2::
the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. As per the
said report, the accused-Gurpreet Singh @ Guri is involved in 10 other
cases.
A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties
have effected a genuine compromise without there being any pressure,
coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote
possibility of the complainant coming forward to support the prosecution
case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like
situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be
faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the
accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in
consonance with the direction issued by the Court in 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.
The possibility of conviction under Section 307 IPC is
extremely unlikely in view of the fact that there is no injury with the firearm.
Further, the learned counsel for the petitioners, while
placing reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Jayrajsinh Digvijaysinh Rana Versus State of Gujarat and
another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in Joginder
Singh & another Vs. State of Punjab and another, CRM-M-23739-2010
decided on 27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another,
CRM-M-37395-2016 decided on 16.05.2017 and Bhoj Raj Vs. State of
Punjab & another, CRM-24945-2019 decided on 27.09.2019, submits
that partial quashing of the FIR was possible on the basis of a compromise.
2 of 3
CRM-M-37634-2022 (O & M) ::3::
Keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in the
aforesaid judgments and the report dated 23.11.2022 of the Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Samana accompanied by the joint statement of both
the parties, the present FIR No.117 dated 06.06.2022 under Sections 307,
341, 323, 365, 511, 506, 148 and 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act
registered with Police Station City Samana, District Patiala and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the
petitioners herein.
Petition stands disposed of.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
November 20, 2022
sukhpreet
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
