Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balbir Singh And Others vs The State Of Haryana And Others on 14 May, 2024
Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
287
CRM-M-861-2024
Date of decision: May 14th, 2024
Balbir Singh and others
.....Petitioners
Versus
The State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Present: Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, Deputy Advocate General,
Haryana.
Mr. Anil Bidhan, Advocate
for respondents No.2 to 6.
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.162 dated
31.10.2015 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 325 of the IPC added late on)
registered at Police Station Alewa, District Jind, along with all
subsequent proceedings including the judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 01.03.2023 and 03.03.2023 respectively, on the basis
of compromise dated 09.11.2023 (Annexure P-3) arrived at, between the
parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties
have arrived at an amicable settlement subsequent to the conviction of
the petitioners in above mentioned case FIR. In support of his
submissions, he has placed reliance upon judgment of this Court in
Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another: 2013(4) RCR
(Criminal) 102 and Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal
No.1393 of 2011 titled as 'Ramawtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh'
decided on 25.10.2021: LL 2021 SC 589, wherein it has been held that
the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked
to quash a complaint/FIR on the basis of a voluntary compromise even
at the post conviction stage.
3. Vide order dated 09.01.2024 of this Court, the parties were
directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get
their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between
them.
4. Report has since been received from learned
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jind, in pursuance of the directions of this
Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the
parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has
indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any
pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private
respondents have also made statement to the effect that they would have
no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.
5. The learned JMIC, Jind, has annexed the statements of the
parties in original, along with its report.
6. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other
accused other than the petitioners and the private respondents are the
only aggrieved persons in the FIR in question.
7. In view of the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate
1st Class, Jind, and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in
Criminal Appeal No.1393 of 2011 titled as 'Ramawtar Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh' decided on 25.10.2021: LL 2021 SC 589 and this
Court in Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another:
2013(4) RCR (Criminal) 102, the instant petition is allowed.
The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom
including judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
01.03.2023/03.03.2023, are quashed qua the petitioners.
8. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms
of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.
May 14th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Puneet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : No
