Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parkash Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 23 November, 2023
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
1
CRM-M-13126-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(271) 2023:PHHC:149747
CRM-M-13126-2023
Date of decision:- 23.11.2023
Parkash Singh
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr.A.S.Manaise, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Anup Singh AAG, Punjab.
Mr.Komalpreet Singh, Advocate for
Mr.Amandeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.
***
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)
1. Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of FIR No.09 dated 25.01.2023,
registered for offences under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and
Sections 506, 188 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sekhwan, Police
District Batala, District Gurdaspur on the basis of compromise dated
01.03.2023 (Annexure P-2).
2. Pursuant to orders dated 16.03.2023 passed by this Court, report has
been received from the Judicial Magistrate, relevant extract of which is as
under:-
"After considering the statements of the parties as well as the
statement of I.O, this Court is of the view that the compromise
between the parties in the present case is genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence. Parties are neither
involved in any other FIR nor they have been declared as
proclaimed offenders in any other criminal case."
3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that FIR (Annexure P-1) is an
outcome of a minor misunderstanding as the petitioner was allegedly
insisting upon non-veg food which the complainant refused to serve as he
was running a vegetarian dhaba.
CRM-M-13126-2023
4. Counsel for the complainant submits that as per the allegations in
the FIR, the petitioner pointed a revolver at the complainant but before he
could fire, he was apprehended by the nephew of the complainant.
5. Upon instructions from ASI-Amrik Singh, IO, State counsel submits
that the matter is under investigation, although the offence under Section
27 of the Arms Act has been deleted as per the status report filed on behalf
of the official respondent.
6. Counsel representing respondent/complainant does not have any
objection in case the compromise is given effect to.
7. Heard counsel for the parties.
8. Dispute has been amicably resolved amongst the parties with the
intervention of the respectables by virtue of compromise, Annexure P-2.
9. In view of the report given by the learned Magistrate and the
judgment of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and
another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and a Full Bench of this Court in
Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal)
1052, this Court is of the view that keeping the criminal proceedings alive
would not serve any purpose and setting them aside would enable the
parties to lead a harmonious and peaceful life.
10. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.09 dated 25.01.2023,
registered for offences under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and
Sections 506, 188 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sekhwan, Police
District Batala, District Gurdaspur is quashed qua the petitioners.
23.11.2023 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
sd JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No.
