Jagdeep Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 19525 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 19525 P&H
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagdeep Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 6 November, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144796



CRM-M-45843-2024(O&M)
                                1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

275                                           CRM-M-45843-2024(O&M)
                                              Date of Decision: 06.11.2024


JAGDEEP SINGH AND ORS                                      ....Petitioners

                                    VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR                                    ....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present :    Ms. Himani Kapila, Advocate for the petitioners.

             Mr. Satjot Singh, AAG, Punjab.

             Ms. Ramandeep Kaur, Advocate for the respondent no.2.


MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

CRM-40355-2024

The application has been filed for placing on record amended

memo of parties in the main case.

For the reasons stated in the application, the application is

allowed and the amended memo of parties is ordered to be taken on

record.

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 is also present in Court

and she has no objection in this regard.

Main Case

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.224

1 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144796

CRM-M-45843-2024(O&M)

dated 22.12.2020 under Sections 323, 341, 160, 506 and 149 of IPC

(charges framed under Sections 148, 323, 341, 506 and 149 of IPC vide

order dated 10.05.2022) registered at Police Station Kalanaur, District

Gurdaspur and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the

basis of compromise dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-2).

2. This Court vide order dated 16.09.2024 had directed the

parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements

recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the

genuineness of the compromise.

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before

the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur and got their

statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned

Magistrate has submitted report dated 09.10.2024 to the effect that the

compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without

any coercion or undue influence. It is also mentioned in the report that

there were seven persons namely Jagdeep Singh Kahlon @ Jagdip Singh

@ Gabbar, Harpreet Singh alias Deepak Kahlon, Gurpreet Singh @ Jass,

Noni Sharma @ Rajneesh Sharma, Manjeet Singh, Avtar Singh and

Satnam Singh Bularia @ Satta who have been arrayed as accused in this

case, however, through this petition all the accused persons as mentioned

above (except Satnam Singh Bularia@ Satta as he has been declared

innocent and challan was not filed against him) and the complainant have

compromised the matter. Separate statements of present petitioners and

2 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144796

CRM-M-45843-2024(O&M)

complainant/respondent No.2 as well as the Investigating Officer had

been recorded. It is further mentioned in the report that a compromise has

been effected between the parties and that the present petitioners have not

been declared proclaimed persons in this case.

4. The factum of compromise having arrived at between the

parties has not been disputed by learned State counsel as well as counsel

for respondent No.2. Learned State counsel, however, has submitted that

it is a case of partial compromise as the co-accused is not a party to the

same and it might have repercussions upon the trial. In the opinion of this

Court, since it has come on record that the compromise has been effected

between the parties to maintain peace and harmony and as there are bleak

chances of conviction of the petitioners, therefore, partial quashing or part

quashing of the FIR qua the petitioners only, can be allowed. In this

regard reliance can be placed upon the observations made by Delhi High

Court in "Sunil Tomar Vs. State of NCT of Delhi", 2022(2) Crl. CC

179 and "Lovely Salhotra and another vs. State of NCT of Delhi",

(2018) 12 SCC 391 as well as judgments passed by the co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in "Parambir Singh Gill vs. Malkiat Kaur", 2010

(1) RCR (Criminal) 256 and "Samay Singh vs. State of Haryana"

2023 NCPHHC 99612.

5 As per the discussion so made above, no useful purpose

would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in

the instant FIR.

3 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:144796

CRM-M-45843-2024(O&M)

6 Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench

judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of

Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and

others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.224 dated

22.12.2020 under Sections 323, 341, 160, 506 and 149 of IPC (charges

framed under Sections 148, 323, 341, 506 and 149 of IPC vide order

dated 10.05.2022) registered at Police Station Kalanaur, District

Gurdaspur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis

of compromise dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the

petitioners herein only.