Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sukhdev Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 30 January, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:012552
2024:PHHC:012552
CRM-M-14743-2016 1
253 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-14743-2016 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 30.01.2024
SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS
...Petitioners
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Manbir Singh Basra, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. AG Punjab.
Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for
respondent No. 2.
****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)
1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of complaint No. 219 dated
06.07.2009 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 307, 326, 323, 324,
379, 341, 148 and 14 of Indian Penal Code titled as Gurnam Singh Vs.
Sukhdev Singh and Others pending in the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur and summoning order dated 14.11.2014
(Annexure P-2) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view
of the compromise dated 10.04.2016 (Annexure P-3).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that
perusal of the record would clearly indicate that no offence under Section
307 of Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioners and he
placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 to
contend that an FIR under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed, in case the
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:012552
2024:PHHC:012552
ingredients attracting the involvement of Section 307 of IPC are missing
from the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that the testimony of PW-
9, Dr. Jagjiwan Ram, who prepared the Medical Legal Report, would
clearly indicate that no offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out
against the petitioners.
2. The following order was passed on 02.05.2016:
"Notice of motion for 19.07.2016.
Mr. C.S. Brar, Deputy Advocate General,
Punjab and Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate has put in
appearance on behalf of respondent No. 1-State and 2 &
3, respectively.
Parties are directed to appear before the trial
Court to get their statements recorded to the satisfaction
of the trial Court within a period of fifteen days and
report be sent accordingly before the next date of
hearing."
3. In compliance of the above order, a report has been received
from the concerned jurisdictional Court that the compromise between the
parties is genuine and arrived at without any pressure or coercion from
anyone.
4. This Court finds force in the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioners and in view of the compromise and the ratio of
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parambir Singh Gill
Vs. Malkiat Kaur 2010(1) RCR (Crl.) 256, Jayaraj Singh Digvijay
Singh Rana Vs. State of Gujrat and Another 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 589,
Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6
SCC 466, Ramgopal and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2021
SCC OnLine SC 834 and Shakuntala Sawhney (Mrs) Vs. Kaushalya
(Mrs.) and others (1980) 1 SCC 63 and Full Bench of this Court in
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:012552
2024:PHHC:012552
Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, this
petition is allowed and complaint No. 219 dated 06.07.2009 (Annexure
P-1) registered under Sections 307, 326, 323, 324, 379, 341, 148 and 14
of Indian Penal Code titled as Gurnam Singh Vs. Sukhdev Singh and
Others pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Gurdaspur and summoning order dated 14.11.2014 (Annexure P-2) and
all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed, qua the
petitioners.
5. Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
30.01.2024 JUDGE
Ajay Goswami
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:012552
3 of 3
