Amarjit Singh Deol And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 5288 P&H

                                                         Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058384




                                                      2023:PHHC:058384
CRM-M-46272-2019                                            --1--

     243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                              CHANDIGARH

                                CRM-M-46272-2019
                                DATE OF DECISION:-25.04.2023


Amarjit Singh Deol and others                                   ...Petitioners.

                              vs.

State of Punjab and another                                     ...Respondents..

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Sukhjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

         Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

      Ms. Arshdeep Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.
      ****
HARKESH MANUJA, J.

By way of present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the

petitioners pray for quashing of FIR No.100, dated 12.10.2013, under

Sections 420, 120-B IPC (Section 419 IPC added later on) registered at

Police Station Hathur, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) along with all

consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise

(Annexure P-2).

2. The FIR in question, appears to be an offshoot of matrimonial

dispute between the parties and the allegations against the petitioners are

that they committed fraud with respondent No.2 and her parents. However,

with the intervention of respectables, the matter has been compromised.

3. Reply by way of affidavit of Rachhpal Singh, PPS, DSP, Raikot

District Ludhiana (Rural) on behalf of respondent-State has been filed in

Court today and the same is taken on record.

4. In pursuance to order dated 31.01.2020 passed by this Court,

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058384

2023:PHHC:058384 CRM-M-46272-2019 --2--

whereby the parties were directed to appear before the trial court for getting

their statements recorded as regards the veracity of compromise arrived at

between them, a report dated 24.06.2021 has been received from the

concerned court, stating that matter has been compromised between

complainant-Kulwinder Kaur and accused persons, namely, Amarjit Singh

Deol (through power of attorney holder, Swaranjit Kaur), Karamjit Singh,

Rajdeep Singh, Bahadur Singh, Amarjit Kaur, Kulwant Singh, Jabar Singh

and Fakir Singh and the same is result of free volition of the parties and

without any threat or pressure and accused-Amarjit Singh Deol is

proclaimed offender.

5. Though, in the report submitted by the trial court, it has been

mentioned that petitioner No.1 was declared as proclaimed offender,

however, on instructions from ASI Surjit Singh, Police Station Hathur,

learned State counsel submits that there is no such order on the file of the

trial court as perhaps proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were initiated

against petitioner No.1, though not culminated and that is why the date of

any such order was not mentioned in the report.

6. Thus once, the compromise has been arrived at between the

parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 has 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 circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no

societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058384

2023:PHHC:058384 CRM-M-46272-2019 --3--

quietus to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR on the basis of

compromise entered into between the parties.

7. The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in

furture, 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 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.

8. Thus, in view of the aforesaid report, accompanied by statements

of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid down in the

aforementioned judgments, the FIR No.100 dated 12.10.2013, under

Sections 420, 120-B IPC (Section 419 IPC added later on) registered at

Police Station Hathur, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) as well as all the

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the

petitioners only.

9. Accordingly, petition stands allowed subject to payment of costs

of Rs.30,000/- to be deposited with the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Association Lawyer's Family Welfare Fund having Account

No.41564846387 with State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Chandigarh,

within a period of two weeks from today.

25.04.2023                                            (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika                                                    JUDGE
          whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
          whether reportable:        Yes/No


                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058384

                                       3 of 3