High CourtsSingle Bench

Gurmail Kaur And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 2 April 2022 · Citation: (2022) 04 P&H CK 0014

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 148, 149, 295A, 307, 323, 324, 326, 452, 459, 506
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Writ Petition No. 653 Of 2022 (O&M)
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

7 paragraphs · 328 words

Gurvinder Singh Gill, J

1.

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of complaint No. COMI/000206/2013, under Sections 307, 452, 326, 323, 324, 459, 295-A, 506, 148, 149 IPC, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jagraon, District Ludhiana, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the parties.

2.

Vide order dated 2.2.2022, the parties had been directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate so as to get their statements recorded qua the factum of compromise.

3.

Report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jagraon, has been received, wherein it has been reported that the statements of petitioners/accused Gurmail Kaur, Manjit Kaur, Binder Kaur @ Satti, Manjit Kaur Panch, Rajinder Singh @ Kaka, Darshan Singh have been recorded. Statements of accused Kiranjit Kaur and Tejwant Kaur Sandhu have been recorded through their Special Power of Attorney holder Manjit Kaur and statement of Amarjit Singh @ Jit Singh has been recorded through his Special Power of Attorney holder Rajinder Singh @ Kaka. Statement of complainant Karamjit Kaur had also been recorded to the effect that the parties have compromised the matter amongst themselves.

4.

The complainant Karamjit Kaur in her statement had stated that she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

5.

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jagraon, has specifically opined that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence.

6.

In view of the aforesaid compromise and bearing in mind the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, the present petition is allowed and complaint No. COMI/000206/2013, under Sections 307, 452, 326, 323, 324, 459, 295-A, 506, 148, 149 IPC, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jagraon, District Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.