High CourtsSingle Bench

Amrik Singh vs State of Punjab and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 December 2013 · Citation: (2013) 12 P&H CK 0106

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rekha Mittal, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M-5559-2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 443 words

Rekha Mittal, J.—The petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No. 55 dated 31.05.2011 under Sections 447, 427, 379, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Banga, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Punjab. In the instant case, the FIR was registered on the statement of respondent No. 2-complainant Krishnawati. Now the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.

2.

Respondent No. 2-complainant Krishnawati is present in Court along with her counsel. Affidavit of respondent No. 2 filed in Court is taken on record. Her statement was recorded in the Court. An extract from her statement is quoted thus:--

FIR No. 55 dated 31.05.2011 was registered at my instance in Police Station Banga for offence under Sections 447, 427, 379, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code against Amrik Singh and his co-accused. The entire matter has been settled by way of compromise between me and all the accused. I have received an amount of Rs. 8 lacs by way of two demand drafts today in the Court. I have filed my affidavit today in the Court, which may be read as part of my statement. I have entered into this compromise according to my free will and without any duress. I have got no objection if the aforesaid FIR and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed against the petitioner and all other accused. I will also withdraw proceedings pending before the Civil/Revenue Courts in regard to land in dispute.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the parties have amicably settled their differences, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the criminal proceedings.

4.

Counsel for the State has not disputed correctness of the contention of the petitioner that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement.

5.

Counsel for respondent No. 2 has conceded the claim of the petitioner.

6.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7.

There is nothing on record to doubt correctness of the compromise effected between the parties, whereby they have decided to settle their dispute with an intention to live in peace and harmony. The present case falls in the category of cases, which can be allowed to be settled by way of compromise, in view of the decision of Hon''ble the Supreme Court of India in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 55 dated 31.05.2011 under Sections 447, 427, 379, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Banga, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Punjab and proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner and others arrayed as accused.