Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sikandar Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab on 7 March, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032401
CRA-S-868-SB-2008
CRR-1902-2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
201
Date of decision: 07.03.2025
1. CRA-S-868-SB-2008 (O&M)
Sikandar Singh and others
....Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
2. CRR-1902-2008 (O&M)
Shamsher Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate
with Mr. Veer Imaan Singh Gill, Advocate
for the appellants in CRA-S-868-SB-2008
and for the petitioner in CRR-1902-2008.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab in both the cases.
Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Amicus Curiae
along with Mr. Satyendra Kumar, Advocate
for the complainant in both the cases.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)
1. Vide this common order, I intend to dispose of CRA-S-868-
SB-2008 and CRR-1902-2008, as common questions of law and facts
are involved for adjudication.
2. Prayer in the appeal i.e. CRA-S-868-SB-2008 is for setting-
aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
09.04.2008, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga in
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032401
CRA-S-868-SB-2008
Criminal Complaint filed under Sections 325, 324, 323, 148, 149 IPC,
vide which the appellants therein were convicted under Sections 148,
325, 324, 323, 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of 2½ years, along with fine and default
mechanism. However, the revision petition i.e. CRR-1902-2008 has
been filed for setting-aside the judgment dated 09.04.2008, passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, whereby all the private
respondents therein were acquitted of the charges framed against them
in FIR No.93 dated 21.06.2003, registered under Sections 307, 324,
323, 34 IPC at Police Station Baghapurana, District Moga.
3. Learned Senior counsel for the appellants (in CRA-S-868-
SB-2008), inter alia submits that the parties herein are members of the
same family. Further, a compromise has been affected between them.
The statements made by the parties have been attested by the Sarpanch
and other respectables of the village, who can verify the authenticity of
the same. As such, he prays for the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 09.04.2008 to be set aside qua the appellants. Reliance in
this regard is placed on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Ramgopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021
(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322.
4. Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate who was appointed as
Amicus Curiae vide order dated 07.08.2023, assisted by learned State
counsel, affirms the factum of compromise arrived at between the
parties.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032401
CRA-S-868-SB-2008
5. Further, the short affidavit dated 05.09.2024, filed on behalf
of the respondent -State, also confirms that a compromise has been
effected between the parties. The operative part of the same reads as
follows:
"3. That in compliance of said order the verification
regarding factum of compromise between the parties was
conducted by ASI Daljit Singh, PS Baghapurana. During
verification respectables persons produced the photocopy
of writing issued by respectable of the village and copy of
Statement of Nachhattar Singh. According to said writing
matter has been compromised between the parties.
However, they flatly refused to get recorded their
statements. Copies of said documents are attached
herewith as Annexure R-1/T to R-3/T. Hence, the affidavit is
being submitted for kind consideration of this Hon'ble
Court."
6. It has been categorically held by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Ramgopal's case (supra), that there is no embargo on quashing
of a criminal complaint even after a judgment of conviction has been
passed. Further, the parties have not recorded their respective statements
before the concerned Magistrates, however, the same is not a statutory
requirement. Moreover, the report submitted by Deputy Superintendent
of Police, Baghapurana, District Moga, establishes that the compromise
is authentic and genuine
7. Therefore, in view of the amicable settlement arrived at
between the parties as well as the ratio laid down in Ramgopal's case
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032401
CRA-S-868-SB-2008
(supra), this Court is inclined to invoke the inherent powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly,
i. The appeal i.e. CRA-S-868-SB-2008 is allowed and the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.04.2008, passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, is set-aside qua the
appellants. The appellants are acquitted of the charges framed
against them and their bail/surety bonds also stand discharged.
ii. The revision petition i.e. CRR-1902-2008 is dismissed and the
judgment dated 09.04.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Moga, of acquittal is upheld qua the private respondents
therein.
8. The High Court Legal Services Authority is directed to
remunerate the learned Amicus Curiae as per rules.
9. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other
connected case.
10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
07.03.2025
yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
