Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarbjeet Kaur And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 September, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
268 CRM-M-63183-2024
Date of Decision: 05.09.2024
Sarbjeet Kaurandanother 20a Petitioner
versus
StateofPunjaband another 20a Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH
Present:- Mr. Imran Faroogi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
(through video conferencing)
Ms. Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocate, for
Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
3B OK EK
GURBIR SINGH, J.(Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.43 dated 24.04.2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and
120-B of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nabha, District Patiala
(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent on the basis of compromise dated 28.06.2023
(Annexure P-2).
2. This Court, vide order dated 23.01.2024, had directed the parties to
appear before the trial Court/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and
the learned Magistrate was directed to send the report qua the genuineness of the
compromise.
3. In compliance thereof, report dated 18.03.2024 from learned Sub
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nabha, District Patiala, has been received through
the District & Sessions Judge, Patiala, with statements of the parties, in which, it
JVOTITHAKUR has been mentioned that the compromise is genuine and has been effected
2024.09.06 17:30
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this ordky¥@tigye@h the parties voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent "No.2-
complainant has not disputed the factum of compromise.
5. Learned State counsel submits that in case the parties have indeed
settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the
FIR.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through
the record.
7. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser.
Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to
a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature
of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably
settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in
futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.
8. 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.43 dated 24.04.2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471
and 120-B of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nabha, District
Patiala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are
quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise dated 28.06.2023.
(GURBIR SINGH)
05.09.2024 JUDGE
Jyoti Thakur
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
JYOTI THAKUR
2024.09.06 17:30
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgement
