Anil Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1154928
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-08-2014
AppellantAnil Kumar
RespondentState of Punjab and Others
Excerpt:
crm m-34674 of 2013 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm m-34674 of 2013 date of decision: 08.07.2014 gurjit singh and others ........petitioners versus state of punjab and others ........respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice r.p.nagrath present:- mr.sukhdeep parmar, advocate for the petitioners.mr.luvinder sofat, aag punjab. mr.sakun k.chaudhary, advocate for respondent no.2 to 4 ***** r.p.nagrath, j. (oral) the instant petition has been filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 for quashing of fir no.69 dated 05.05.2010 for the offence under sections 324, 341,323,506, 148, 149 ipc registered at police station sadar nabha, district patiala (annexure p-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise. report has been received from trial court after recording statements of the respondent no.2 and the petitioners on compromise. the trial court has reported that compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. trial court has also sent photostat copies of statements of parties recorded by it. learned counsel for the state on instructions from asi manjit singh, submits that petitioners are only accused in the fir. learned anil kumar state counsel further submits on instructions that petitioners and one pali 2014.07.09 16:31 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document crm m-34674 of 2013 2 were only accused in this fir but pali is stated to have died. fir was recorded by surjan singh is only injured in this case. surjan singh died on 03.06.2013 in an accident. respondent no.2, the wife and respondent nos.3 and 4, son and daughter respectively are the only legal hears of late surjan singh. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parents of surjan singh are not alive. no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the case in view of the compromise arrived at between them. in view of the statements and report of the trial court and the principles laid down by the full bench judgment of this 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 scc303the instant petition is allowed and fir no.69 dated 05.05.2010 for the offence under sections 324, 341,323,506, 148, 149 ipc registered at police station sadar nabha, district patiala (annexure p-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements. (r.p.nagrath) judge0807.2014 anil anil kumar 2014.07.09 16:31 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

CRM M-34674 of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-34674 of 2013 Date of Decision: 08.07.2014 Gurjit Singh and others ........Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH Present:- Mr.Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Luvinder Sofat, AAG Punjab.

Mr.Sakun K.Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.2 to 4 ***** R.P.NAGRATH, J.

(ORAL) The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.69 dated 05.05.2010 for the offence under Sections 324, 341,323,506, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Nabha, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.

Report has been received from trial Court after recording statements of the respondent No.2 and the petitioners on compromise.

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

Trial Court has also sent photostat copies of statements of parties recorded by it.

Learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Manjit Singh, submits that petitioners are only accused in the FIR.

Learned Anil Kumar State counsel further submits on instructions that petitioners and one Pali 2014.07.09 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM M-34674 of 2013 2 were only accused in this FIR but Pali is stated to have died.

FIR was recorded by Surjan Singh is only injured in this case.

Surjan Singh died on 03.06.2013 in an accident.

Respondent No.2, the wife and respondent Nos.3 and 4, son and daughter respectively are the only legal hears of late Surjan Singh.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parents of Surjan Singh are not alive.

No useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the case in view of the compromise arrived at between them.

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this 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 SCC303the instant petition is allowed and FIR No.69 dated 05.05.2010 for the offence under Sections 324, 341,323,506, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Nabha, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

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

(R.P.NAGRATH) JUDGE0807.2014 anil Anil Kumar 2014.07.09 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document