Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harish Mittu @ Vicky vs Ut Chandigarh And Another on 1 December, 2023
Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153400
CRM-M-28120-2022 (O&M) -1- 2023:PHHC:153400
266
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-28120-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 01.12.2023
Harish Mittu @ Vicky
....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Territory, Chandigarh and another
.....Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI
Present: Mr. Sikandh Mehta, Advocate, for
Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Roopse Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Anil Kumar Lamdharia, APP, U.T. Chandigarh.
Mr. Raghav Bali, Advocate, for
Mr. Parveen Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
****
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No. 88 dated 25.05.2022,
under Section 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Industrial Area,
Chandigarh alongwith all other consequential proceedings, based upon
compromise (Annexure P-2).
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted
that it is a case where there was one on one dispute between the petitioner
and respondent No.2 with regard to the purchase of a car and thereafter, the
matter has been settled amicably and, therefore, no useful purpose will be
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153400
CRM-M-28120-2022 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:153400
served in case further proceedings are carried on against the petitioner. He
further submitted that in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court on
05.07.2022, the parties have already appeared before the learned Magistrate,
Chandigarh and got the statements recorded with regard to the factual
position of the compromise and considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances where the matter has been amicably settled between the
parties, the FIR alongwith all the consequential proceedings may be
quashed.
3. Ms. Roopse Sharma, Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. Anil
Kumar Lamdharia, APP, U.T. Chandigarh has submitted that the subject
matter of the present FIR does not fall in the category of serious or heinous
offence since it was a dispute between two parties only.
4. Ms. Raghav Bali, Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. Parveen
Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2 has submitted that it is correct that
an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and he has
no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon compromise.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court on 05.07.2022,
a report has been received from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandigarh dated 14.09.2022 whereby it has been so reported that on the
basis of the statements recorded by the parties, the compromise as effected
between them appears to be genuine and effected without any fear, pressure
or undue influence and the petitioner has not been declared as a proclaimed
offender. Apart from the above, it has also been stated in the report that
besides the present complainant, there is no other victim in this case.
7. The law with regard to quashing of FIR based upon
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153400
CRM-M-28120-2022 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:153400
compromise is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian
Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012(10) SCC 303, "State of
Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others", 2019(2) SCC (Crl.)
706 and and Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and
others Vs. State of Punjab and others", 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052
observed that in case where the Court finds that the subject matter of the
case is not serious or heinous and the parties have arrived at an amicable
settlement voluntarily or without any force or coercion, then considering the
facts and circumstances of each and every case, the FIR can be quashed
based upon compromise.
8. A perusal of the FIR would show that it was a dispute
pertaining to purchase of a car which does not fall in the category of any
serious or heinous offence. Furthermore, the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate has also reported that as per the statements of the parties, the
compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue
influence. Therefore, this Court is of the view that since the subject matter of
the present case does not fall in the category of any serious or heinous
offence and the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, it is a
fit case for quashing of the FIR based upon compromise.
9. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the FIR No.
88 dated 25.05.2022, under Section 420 IPC, registered at Police Station
Industrial Area, Chandigarh alongwith all other consequential proceedings is
hereby quashed qua the petitioner based upon compromise.
01.12.2023 (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
rakesh JUDGE
Whether speaking : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153400
3 of 3
