High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Akshdeep Singh And Others vs State Of U.T. Chandigarh & Another on 10 July, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Akshdeep Singh And Others vs State Of U.T. Chandigarh & Another on 10 July, 2009
 CRM No. M-11738 of 2009                          1



    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
              HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                                CRM No. M-11738 of 2009 (O&M)
                                Date of decision: 10.7.2009

Akshdeep Singh and others                             ...Petitioners

                            Versus

State of U.T. Chandigarh & another                    ...Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:    Mr. S.S. Narula, Advocate, for the petitioners.
            Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate, for U.T. Chandigarh.
            Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for respondent No.2.


Rajan Gupta, J.

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482

Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.21 dated 8th February, 2009, under

Sections 452, 323, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police

Station Sector 3, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1) and the subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure

P-2) arrived at between the parties.

Complainant/respondent No.2, namely, Radhwinder Singh

@ Raghwinder Singh and the injured namely, Saurav Parashar are

present in Court. They are duly identified by their counsel. They have

filed their separate affidavits, which are taken on record as Mark ‘A’ and

Mark ‘B’ admitting therein the factum of compromise (Annexure P-2)

arrived at between the parties. They state that they have no objection if
CRM No. M-11738 of 2009 2

the present FIR is quashed.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the

fact that the parties have compromised the matter, the State would not

stand in the way of quashing of the FIR.

The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the

matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is

likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings.

In view of the above, the present FIR and the consequent

proceedings deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of Full

Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of

Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052.

Resultantly, the present petition is allowed, the FIR and the

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE
July 10, 2009
‘rajpal’