High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Lakha Ram vs The Union Territory Of Chandigarh … on 27 January, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakha Ram vs The Union Territory Of Chandigarh … on 27 January, 2009
Crl.Misc.No.M-1105 of 2009                                   [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT             OF PUNJAB         AND HARYANA AT
                             CHANDIGARH.


                              Criminal Misc. No. M-1105 of 2009

                              Date of Decision: 27 - 1 - 2009



Lakha Ram                                              .....Petitioner

                              v.

The Union Territory of Chandigarh & another            .....Respondent



CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

                              ***

Present:    Mr.J.S.Bagga, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr.Ram Pal Verma, Advocate for
            Mr.Rajiv Sharma, Advocate
            for respondent No.1.

            Mr.Anil Shukla, Advocate
            for respondent No.2.

                              ***

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

seeking quashing of case FIR No.118 dated 11.6.2008 registered at Police

Station, Sector 3, Chandigarh under Section 420 IPC. It has been stated in

the FIR that complainant-respondent No.2 is working as a Lecturer in an

Engineering College at Solan. It has been stated in the FIR that petitioner

Lakha Ram had duped him of Rs.2 lacs on the pretext of sending him

abroad.

During the pendency of the FIR and presentation of report
Crl.Misc.No.M-1105 of 2009 [2]

under Section 173 Cr.P.C., a compromise has been arrived between the

parties. A sum of Rs.1,95,000/- has been returned by the accused-petitioner

to complainant-respondent No.2. Complainant Dinesh Kumar is present in

Court. He is identified by Mr.Anil Shukla, Advocate. He has been also

identified by ASI Jasmer Singh, Police Station, Sector 3, Chandigarh.

Dinesh Kumar has stated in Court that he has settled the dispute and does

not wish to pursue the case.

It has been held in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of

Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that where a

compromise has been effected between the parties, continuation of

proceedings will serve no useful purpose. Therefore, the impugned FIR

along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed.

Petition is disposed off.

( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
January 27, 2008. JUDGE
RC