High CourtsSingle Bench

Rahul @ Rahul Kumar vs State of Haryana & another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 29 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 P&H CK 3144

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manjari Nehru Kaul, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 341, 379(B), 506
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M No.47574 Of 2021
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 · 333 words

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J

1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.352 dated 06.09.2019 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 341, 379-B and 506 IPC at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 30.10.2021 (Annexure P-2) effected between the parties.

2.

Vide order dated 15.11.2021 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

3.

Report has since been received from learned District & Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, in pursuance of the direction of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report, compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioner is quashed.

4.

The trial Court has annexed a copy of the statements of the parties, along with its report.

5.

Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioner and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.

6.

In view of the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in ‘Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others’ (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in ‘Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another’ 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it qua the petitioner, are quashed.

7.

Needless to say, the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.