Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhvir Singh @ Lucky @ Lakhvir Kumar Rai vs State Of Punjab And Another on 16 April, 2024
290 2024:PHHC:051294
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8666-2024
Date of Decision: April 16, 2024
LAKHVIR SINGH @ LUCKY @ LAKHVIR KUMAR RAI ........Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present:Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
By way of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the
petitioner prays for quashing of case bearing FIR No.111 dated
12.07.2018 registered under Section 420 of IPC and Section 24 of Punjab
Travel Professional Regulations Act 2014 at P.S. Division No.2, Jalandhar
along with all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on
the basis of compromise dated 17.09.2018.
2. As per allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioner defrauded
the complainant-respondent No.2 of Rs.2,99,000/- on the pretext of
sending him abroad.
3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated
26.02.2024 directed the parties to appear before trial Court for getting their
statements recorded as regards the veracity of the compromise arrived at
between them.
4. In pursuance to the order dated 26.02.2024, a report dated
06.04.2024 has been received from the concerned Court, stating that the
compromise in the present case is genuine and voluntary.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once, a
compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure
and respondents No.2 has no objection as regards quashing of FIR as
well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against
the petitioner; the dispute purely personal in nature, there does not appear
to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR. He also
submits that even, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the
parties, particularly under the circumstances wherein the alleged offences
have 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.
6. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that
allegations in the present FIR are of serious nature and he opposes the
prayer made in the petition.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the records including the report dated 06.04.2024. The parties
having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in future, 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 Punjab 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".
8. 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 petition is allowed and FIR
No. 111 dated 12.07.2018 registered under Section 420 of IPC and
Section 24 of Punjab Travel Professional Regulations Act 2014 at P.S.
Division No.2, Jalandhar along with all consequential proceeding arising
therefrom, are hereby quashed.
9. The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment
of Costs of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the Poor Patients' Welfare
Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh, within a period of two weeks from today.
16.04.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
Tejwinder JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
