Punjab-Haryana High Court
Reena Mehta And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 22 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:042099
2024:PHHC:042099
117+220 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-52920-2022 (O & M)
Date of decision: 22.03.2024
REENA MEHTA AND ANOTHER
...PETITIONERS
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking
quashing of FIR No.367 dated 10.12.2019 under Sections 307, 353, 186, 506
of IPC registered at Police Station City Kapurthala, District Kapurthala
(Annexure P-1) along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise dated 01.09.2020 (Annexure P-2).
2. The following order was passed on 22.02.2024 :-
"This is an application under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. seeking extension of time to record the statements
of the parties before the learned trial Court in support of
the compromise.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits
that due to some unavoidable circumstances, the parties
could not appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support
of the compromise and seeks one more opportunity for
complying with the order dated 15.01.2024.
In the interest of justice, last opportunity is
granted to the parties for appearing before the learned trial
Court/Illaqa Magistrate within a period of two weeks or
any other date convenient to the trial Court/Illaqa
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:042099
2024:PHHC:042099
Magistrate to get their statements recorded regarding the
compromise in the same terms as mentioned in the order
dated 25.05.2023, subject to payment of cost amounting to
Rs. 10,000/- to be paid in PGIMER Poor Patient Welfare
Fund, Chandigarh.
Report of learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial
Court be awaited for 22.03.2024."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the
perusal of the record would indicate that no offence under Section 307 of
Indian Penal Code is made out. In this regard reliance is placed on the
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of The State
of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019 (5) SCC 688.
4. 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.
5. In view of the compromise and the ratio of law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in 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
Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, this petition
is allowed and FIR No.367 dated 10.12.2019 under Sections 307, 353, 186,
506 of IPC registered at Police Station City Kapurthala, District Kapurthala
(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are
quashed, qua the petitioners.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
March 22, 2024 JUDGE
manisha
(i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
(ii) Whether reportable Yes/No
2 of 2
