Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ishwar Singh Malik & Others vs State Of Haryana & Another on 15 April, 2024
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
2024:PHHC:049891
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRM-5161-2024 in/and
CRM-M-33537-2018 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-15.04.2024
Ishwar Singh Malik and others ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. K.S.Mamrat, Advocate for
Mr. Shekhar Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Kamal Kant, Advocate, for respondent No.2
(appeared through video confrencing).
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)
CRM-5161-2024
The instant application has been filed seeking fixing of an actual date
in the main case for its final disposal.
Learned counsel submits that many of the petitioners are in their
advanced age and are in their 70s and that since the FIR was lodged way
back in the year 2014, it will be in the interest of justice that the matter be
listed for final hearing.
integrity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-33537-2018 (O&M) (2) 2024:PHHC:049891
In view of the submissions made above, the instant application is
accepted and the main case is taken on Board today itself for final hearing.
CRM-M-33537-2018 (O&M)
1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.261,
dated 03.06.2014, Police Station Butana, District Karnal, under Sections 406,
420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC (Annexure P-1) and all consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of compromise having been
effected between the parties.
2. Upon perusal of the FIR, this Court finds that it is a case where the
allegations are that the accused had sold off the land which vested in State.
3. Learned counsel submits that as a matter of fact State is not the aggrieved
party and the FIR in question has been lodged by a private person i.e.
Kulwant Singh who does not have any objection for quashing of the FIR.
4. Learned counsel representing the complainant has been associated through
video confrencing and has stated that he has no objection for quashing of the
FIR.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the
petition and has submitted that since it is a case where several Government
officials had apparently connived with the accused so as to squander away
the property of the State, no case for quashing of FIR on the basis of
compromise is made out as the property of State is involved.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission, this Court finds that since the interest of
State is involved and State has not compromised the matter and rather
integrity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-33537-2018 (O&M) (3) 2024:PHHC:049891
learned State counsel is vehemently opposing the petition, no ground for
quashing the FIR is made out.
7. The petition, as such, is sans merit and is disposed of with a direction to the
trial Court concerned to take all necessary steps as may be possible for
expeditious disposal of the trial.
15.04.2024 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL )
mohan JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
integrity of this order/judgment
