Manpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 9285 P&H

                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083753




                                                       2023:PHHC:083753

CRM-M-7533-2023                                                -1-


   (270) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                                CRM-M-7533-2023
                                                Date of decision :04.07.2023


MANPREET SINGH
                                                                     ... Petitioner

                                       Versus


STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER
                                                               ...Respondents
CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:     Ms. Kashish Aggarwal, Advocate for
             Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate
             for the petitioners.
             Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

             Ms. Taanvi Dhull, Advocate for
             Mr. Lovish Arora, Advocate
             for respondent No.2.
                         ****

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL)

The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.152

dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 307, 336, 120-

B, 34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Dakha,

District Ludhiana along with all the consequential proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of a compromise dated 12.01.2023 (Annexure P-2),

arrived at between the parties.

Vide order dated 14.02.2023 passed by this Court had

directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their

statements recorded with regard to the aforesaid compromise.

1 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083753

2023:PHHC:083753

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this

aforesaid regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order.

Pursuant to the order dated 14.02.2023, the parties have

appeared before the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ludhiana

and as per the report dated 10.03.2023 submitted to this Court by the

learned Magistrate, both the parties have got recorded their respective

statements in Court. The co-accused namely, Raghuvinder Singh alias

Ricky, Rajvir Singh alias Ravi, Gurvinder Singh alias Gari, Amrinder

Singh, Balkar Singh, Gurpreet Singh and Jaspal Singh have been acquitted

vide judgment dated 21.02.2019.

A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties

have a effected 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".

In the present case, undoubtedly, the FIR has been registered

under Section 307 IPC and also under the provisions of the Arms Act and

therefore, the question would be as to whether the FIR could be quashed.

2 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083753

2023:PHHC:083753

This Court was informed by the learned counsel for the

petitioners that it is a case of no injury, which fact has been admitted by the

learned counsel for respondent No.2 as also the State counsel.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and Others vs

State of Punjab and Another, 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, and State of

Madhya Pradesh vs Laxmi Narayan and Others, 2019(2) RCR

(Criminal) 255, have categorized those cases where quashing on the basis

of compromise was permitted and those in which, it was not permitted. It

was further observed that the Court concerned may look into the medical

evidence and examine the same to see as to whether the conviction under

Section 307 of the IPC was possible or not.

Thus, mere registration of an FIR under Section 307 did not

foreclose the right of the petitioner/accused to effect a compromise and get

the FIR quashed.

In the present case, as is apparent, it is a case of no injury.

Hence, with a view to put a quietus to the incident between the parties, it

would be in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings on the basis of

compromise. Even as per the FIR, no injury has been caused by the

petitioners to complainant and the possibility of a conviction being

recorded under Section 307 IPC is extremely unlikely.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. FIR

No.152 dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 307,

336, 120-B, 34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act at Police

3 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083753

2023:PHHC:083753

Station Dakha, District Ludhiana along with all the consequential

proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 04.07.2023 JITESH

Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No

Whether reportable:- Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083753

4 of 4