Avtar Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1197 P&H

CRM-M-54765-2018 (O&M)                                                     --1--

     249 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                               CHANDIGARH

                                CRM-M-54765-2018 (O&M)
                                DATE OF DECISION:-19.01.2023


Avtar Singh and others                                          ...Petitioners.

                               vs.

State of Punjab and others                                      ...Respondents..

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate for the petitioners.

          Mr. Ravinder Singh, AAG, Punjab

          Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate for
          Mr. Rameshwar Singh, Advocate,
          respondent No.2.

          None for respondent No.3.

          None for the applicant (in CRM-5868-2019).

          ****

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

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

petitioners pray for quashing of FIR No.147 dated 04.07.2017, under

Sections 406, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at

Police Station City Kharar (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential

proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated

04.12.2018 (Annexure P-2).

2. As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioners cheated

the complainant by playing fraud and sold the residential plot with total sale

consideration of Rs.70 lacs.

                                     1 of 4

 CRM-M-54765-2018 (O&M)                                                   --2--

3. In pursuance to an order dated 11.12.2018 passed by this Court,

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

their statements recorded as regards the veracity of the compromise arrived

at between them, report dated 14.01.2019 has been received from the

concerned court, stating that the compromise is genuine, voluntarily and has

been arrived at between the parties out of their free will. There are total 10

accused in the present FIR, but Kirpal Singh has not approached this Court ,

besides there being two complainants, who have no objection, if the FIR

against the accused persons is quashed. No accused has been declared as

proclaimed offender. There is no other case pending against the petitioners.

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

parties without any pressure and respondents No.2 and 3 have 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. Even otherwise, in

order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under

the circumstances wherein the alleged offences has 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

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 directions issued by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of

2 of 4

CRM-M-54765-2018 (O&M) --3--

Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab

& Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543.

Further, the learned counsel for the petitioners, while placing

reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Jayrajsinh Digvijaysinh Rana Vs. 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, passed in CRM-M-23739- 2010 decided on

27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another, passed in

CRM-M- 37395-2016 decided on 16.05.2017 and Vimal Kalra & others

Vs. State of Punjab & another, passed in CRMM-20355-2022, decided on

25.07.2022 also submits that partial quashing of the FIR is even permissible

on the basis of a compromise.

6. 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.147 dated 04.07.2017, under

Sections 406, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at

Police Station City Kharar (Annexure P-1) as well as all the subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners only.

7. Though, application bearing CRM-5868-2019 has been moved on

behalf of applicant-Kirpal Singh, for impleading as party-petitioner in the

present case, however, neither anyone appeared on his behalf nor even his

statement was ordered to be recorded before the trial court.

8. Considering the aforesaid, Kirpal Singh, shall be at liberty to

approach this Court again by filing a separate petition, if so, advised.

9. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of but subject to deposit of

a sum of Rs.50,000/- by the petitioners within a period of two weeks from

3 of 4

CRM-M-54765-2018 (O&M) --4--

today in the following account:-

Account Name - Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association Lawyer's Family Welfare Fund Account No.-41564846387 Bank Name- SBI High Court Branch.

19.01.2023                                          (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika                                                  JUDGE

          whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
          whether reportable:        Yes/No




                                     4 of 4