Baljinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another

Baljinder Singh vs State of Punjab and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Aug 19, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1069813

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/1069813
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Aug 19, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Baljinder Singh

Respondent

State of Punjab and Another

Excerpt

.....crm not m- 2349 of 2013 & -2- crm not m-17498 of 2013 report has been received from trial court after recording statements of the parties in crm not m-2349 of 2013 dated 18.07.2013 on compromise along with the copy of statement of respondent no.2- complainant. respondent no.2-complainant made a statement before the trial court that he has no objection if the present fir is quashed. as per the terms of compromise entire amount has been paid. respondent counsel does not dispute the factum of the parties having entered into compromise. the trial court has reported that compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. learned counsel for the state on instructions from hc surjeet singh submits that during the investigation of the case recovery of amount of `49,000/- has been made from the baljinder singh-petitioner in crm not m-2349 of 2013 and petitioner's counsel also agreed as per the terms of settlement that the amount lying with the police shall be returned to respondent no.2/complainant on behalf of the company. in view of the statements and report of the trial court and the principles laid down by this hon'ble court in kulwinder singh and others versus state of punjab and another, 2007 (3) rcr (criminal) 1052, approved by hon'ble apex court in gian singh versus state of punjab and others (2012) 10 scc 30.the instant petitions are allowed and the f.i.r.and consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof for offences under sections 408/420/120-b ipc are quashed. needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the court below. (r.p.nagrath) judge august 19, 2013 nitin nitin 2013.08.22 12:01 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Full Judgment

CRM not M- 2349 of 2013 & -1- CRM not M-17498 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM not M-2349 of 2013 Date of Decision:

19. 08.2013 Baljinder Singh ......Petitioner(s) versus State of Punjab and another .........Respondent(s) 2.

CRM not M-17498 of 2013 Gurmeet Ram .......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH Present: Mr.G.S.Bhandari, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Mikhail Kad, A.AG, Punjab.

Ms.Rashmi Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

***** R.P.NAGRATH, J.

(ORAL) This order shall disposed of CRM not M-2349 of 2013 and CRM not M-17498 of 2013.

The instant petitions are for quashing of F.I.R.No.41 dated 05.05.2011 registered under Sections 408/420/120-B I.P.C.and the consequent proceedings on the basis of written compromise signed by the parties.

Nitin 2013.08.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM not M- 2349 of 2013 & -2- CRM not M-17498 of 2013 Report has been received from trial Court after recording statements of the parties in CRM not M-2349 of 2013 dated 18.07.2013 on compromise along with the copy of statement of respondent No.2- complainant.

Respondent No.2-complainant made a statement before the trial Court that he has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

As per the terms of compromise entire amount has been paid.

Respondent counsel does not dispute the factum of the parties having entered into compromise.

The trial Court has reported that compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion.

Learned counsel for the State on instructions from HC Surjeet Singh submits that during the investigation of the case recovery of amount of `49,000/- has been made from the Baljinder Singh-petitioner in CRM not M-2349 of 2013 and petitioner's counsel also agreed as per the terms of settlement that the amount lying with the police shall be returned to respondent No.2/complainant on behalf of the company.

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the principles laid down by this Hon'ble Court in Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (criminal) 1052, approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 30.the instant petitions are allowed and the F.I.R.and consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof for offences under Sections 408/420/120-B IPC are quashed.

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below.

(R.P.NAGRATH) JUDGE August 19, 2013 Nitin nitin 2013.08.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Baljinder Singh vs State of Punjab and Another Same Subject Education