High CourtsSingle Bench

Pardip Kumar vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 21 July 2014 · Citation: (2014) 07 P&H CK 0774

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajan Gupta, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 34, 452, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM M-37044 of 2013
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 · 339 words

Rajan Gupta, J.—Petitioners have filed this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 167 dated 07.09.2011 registered under sections 452/323/506/34 IPC at police station Jandiala, Amritsar City and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that during the pendency of this petition, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and dispute has been amicably settled. Relying upon the judgment reported as Kulwinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, learned counsel submit that in view of compromise, the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed.

3.

Learned State counsel does not dispute the ratio of judgment in Kulwinder Singh''s case supra and submit that in case a compromise is arrived at between the parties the State shall not stand in the way of quashing of FIR.

4.

Heard.

5.

It appears that while issuing notice of motion a direction was issued by this court to record the statements of the parties with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise. A report has been received from the trial court. Operative part thereof reads thus:-

I have gone through the statement given by the parties and posed various questions to know whether any compromise has been effected between the parties. I am satisfied that compromise has been effected between the parties and without any pressure or coercion of anyone. The sole purpose of the parties for effecting compromise between them is their desire to live in peace and harmony.

6.

The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served by continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in light of Full Bench judgment of this court in Kulwinder Singh''s case supra.

7.

Resultantly, the present petition is allowed. The FIR in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.