Balkar Singh and Others Vs. the State of Punjab and Others

Balkar Singh and Others vs The State of Punjab and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided May 14, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1068030

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1068030
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: May 14, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Balkar Singh and Others

Respondent

The State of Punjab and Others

Excerpt

.....kumar, advocate, for respondent nos.2 and 3 l.n.mittal, j. (oral) accused balkar singh and his two sons have filed this petition under section 482 of code of criminal procedure (for short, cr.p.c.) for quashing of fir no.68 dated 5.7.2011, under sections 324, 323, 34 ipc subsequently added section 326 ipc, police station sekhwan, district gurdaspur, in view of compromise effected with respondent no.2-injured complainant who has furnished affidavit (annexure p/1) regarding the compromise. respondent no.3 is wife of respondent no.2 and is alleged eye witness to the occurrence but she did not suffer any injury in the occurrence. i have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 stated that parties have effected compromise for which respondent no.2-injured complainant has furnished affidavit annexure p/1 and therefore, respondent nos.2 and 3 criminal misc. not m-25720 of 2011 -2- have no objection if the impugned fir is quashed. statements of the parties recorded by trial court pursuant to order of this court have also been received to the effect that they have voluntarily effected compromise. learned state counsel, on instructions from asi surjan singh, stated that grievous hurt with sharp weapon relating to offence under section 326 ipc was on leg i.e.on non-vital part. in appropriate cases, fir can be quashed by this court on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent powers under section 482 cr.p.c., even if the offences are not compoundable. it was so held by full bench of this court in the case of kulwinder singh vs state of punjab, 2007 (3) law herald (punjab & haryana) 2225. in the instant case, petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are real brothers whereas petitioners no.2 and 3 are sons of petitioner no.1 i.e.nephews of respondent no.2-complainant. there are cross-cases relating to the occurrence. both the cross-cases have been compromised. accordingly, it is a fit case in which fir should be quashed so.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.

not M-25720 of 2011 Date of decision : May 14, 2013 Balkar Singh and others ....Petitioners versus The State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice L.N.Mittal Present : Mr.J.Virk, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr.Mikhail Kad, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1 Mr.Maharaj Kumar, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 and 3 L.N.Mittal, J.

(Oral) Accused Balkar Singh and his two sons have filed this petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, Cr.P.C.) for quashing of FIR No.68 dated 5.7.2011, under sections 324, 323, 34 IPC subsequently added section 326 IPC, Police Station Sekhwan, District Gurdaspur, in view of compromise effected with respondent No.2-injured complainant who has furnished affidavit (Annexure P/1) regarding the compromise.

Respondent No.3 is wife of respondent No.2 and is alleged eye witness to the occurrence but she did not suffer any injury in the occurrence.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 stated that parties have effected compromise for which respondent No.2-injured complainant has furnished affidavit Annexure P/1 and therefore, respondent Nos.2 and 3 Criminal Misc.

not M-25720 of 2011 -2- have no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.

Statements of the parties recorded by trial court pursuant to order of this Court have also been received to the effect that they have voluntarily effected compromise.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Surjan Singh, stated that grievous hurt with sharp weapon relating to offence under section 326 IPC was on leg i.e.on non-vital part.

In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed by this Court on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent powers under section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable.

It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh vs State of Punjab, 2007 (3) Law Herald (Punjab & Haryana) 2225.

In the instant case, petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are real brothers whereas petitioners No.2 and 3 are sons of petitioner No.1 i.e.nephews of respondent No.2-complainant.

There are cross-cases relating to the occurrence.

Both the cross-cases have been compromised.

Accordingly, it is a fit case in which FIR should be quashed so that the parties may live in peace and harmony as close family membeRs.Resultantly, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No.68 dated 5.7.2011, under sections 324, 323, 34 IPC subsequently added section 326 IPC, Police Station Sekhwan, District Gurdaspur, is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

( L.N.Mittal ) May 14, 2013 Judge 'dalbir'

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Balkar Singh and Others vs The State of Punjab and Others Same Subject Education