High CourtsSingle Bench

Sunil Dhingra & Another vs State Of Haryana & Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 P&H CK 0165

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 33094 Of 2020

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 252 words

Gurvinder Singh Gill, J

1.

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.301 dated 02.08.2020 registered at Police Station Matlauda, District

Panipat, under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 IPC and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise

having been effected between the parties.

2.

Vide order dated 24.11.2020, the parties had been directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court so as to get their statements recorded

qua the factum of compromise.

3.

Report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Panipat, has been received, wherein it has been reported that the statements of accused/petitioners

Sunil Dhingra and Kapil Dhingra and also of complainant Dilawar have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter amongst

themselves.

4.

The complainant Dilawar in his statement has stated that he has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

5.

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Panipat has specifically opined that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily without there

being any pressure, coercion and 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 FIR No.301 dated 02.08.2020 registered at Police Station Matlauda, District

Panipat, under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 IPC and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua

petitioners.