Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gur Pratap Singh And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 13 May, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066657
288
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-63473-2023
Date of decision : 13.05.2024
GUR PRATAP SINGH AND ANOTHER
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Digvijay Singh Nehra, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Ms. Aditi Girdhar, Asstt. A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Rahul Dhanda, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL)
The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.574
dated 25.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 10, 16, 24,
25 of the Immigration Act and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B
IPC at Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula, Haryana along with all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a
compromise arrived at between the parties.
Vide order dated 18.12.2023 this Court had directed the
parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements
recorded with regard to the compromise dated 29.07.2023 (P-3) and the
Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving
certain details as enumerated in the said order.
Pursuant to the order dated 18.12.2023 passed by this Court,
the parties have appeared before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066657
Panchkula and as per the report dated 12.03.2024 submitted to this
Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in
Court.
A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties
have a effected genuine compromise without there being any pressure,
coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote
possibility of the complainant coming forward to support the prosecution
case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like
situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be
faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the
accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance
with the direction issued by the 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".
Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing
reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Jayrajsinh Digvijaysinh Rana Versus State of Gujarat and another,
2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in Joginder Singh &
another Vs. State of Punjab and another, CRM-M-23739-2010
decided on 27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab &
another, CRM-M-37395-2016 decided on 16.05.2017, Bhoj Raj Vs.
State of Punjab & another, CRM-24945-2019 decided on 27.09.2019
and Vimal Kalra & others Versus State of Punjab & another, CRM-
M-20355-2022, decided on 25.07.2022 submits that partial quashing of
the FIR was possible on the basis of a compromise.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066657
In view of the aforesaid report of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Panchkula accompanied by statements of both the parties, the
FIR No.574 dated 25.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections
10, 16, 24, 25 of the Immigration Act and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471
and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula, haryana along with
all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua
the petitioners.
Petition stands disposed of.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
13.05.2024
JITESH
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
