Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramandeep Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 2 September, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114106
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
279 CRM-M M No.31818 OF 2024
Date of decision: 02.09.2024
RAMANDEEP SINGH .... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present : Mr. Rahul Soi,, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr
( Through Video Conference)..
Conference).
Mr. Satjot Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Lalit Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
MANISHA BATRA,
BATRA J. (oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.56 dated 16.05.2024 registered
under Sections 307, 323, 324, 341, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station
Division-04,, District Patiala and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 10.06.2024 (Annexure P-2).
2. This Court vide order dated 08.07.2024 had directed the parties to
appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and tthe
he learned
Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the
compromise.
3. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent No.2 is taken on
record
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the
learned Judicial Magistrate
Magi Ist Class, Patiala and got their statements recorded.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114106
CRM-M
On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted
report dated 08.08.2024 to the effect that the compromise has been effected
between the parties voluntarily and without
without any coercion or undue influence. It
is also mentioned in the report that apart from the petitioner, there are three
more accused in the present FIR however, matter has been compromised qua
the present petitioner only. Statements of respondent No.2/comp
No.2/complainant
lainant 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 petitioner has
ha not been declared proclaimed person in this case.
5 The factum
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
co accused are 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 petitioner, therefore, partial quashing or part quashing of the FIR qua the
petitioner 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.
Cr 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
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.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:114106
CRM-M
6 As per the discussion so made abvoe
abvoe,, no useful purpose would be
served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant
FIR.
7. 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
allow and FIR No.56 dated 16.05.2024 registered
under Sections 307, 323, 324, 341, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station
Division-04,
04, District Patiala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom
on the basis of compromise dated 14.12.2023 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua
the petitioner herein only.
(MANISHA BATRA)
02.09.2024 JUDGE
Jyoti-IV
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No.
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
