MALKIAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 121 dated 25.12.2013 registered under Sections 307, 427, 148, 149 I.P.C. at Police station Begowal District Kapurthala on the basis of compromise between the parties. The F.I.R. was registered on a statement made by Malkiat Kaur wife of Karnail Singh. It was alleged that on 19.12.2013 at about 9:00 p.m., she with her husband Karnail Singh and daughter Daljit Kaur were at home. They heard the sound of a tractor trolley striking against the pillar of their main gate of their house. She and her husband came out and saw that the tiles affixed on the pillar of main gate have been broken. She and her husband told Jograj alias Joga son of Karnail Singh who was unloading the sand of their neighbour Gurnam Singh that he has caused loss to them by breaking the tiles of their main gate, which should be compensated to them. In the meantime, the owner of tractor trolley Malkiat Singh alias Minta son Mohinder Singh along with Balwinder Singh alias Bittu son of Pritam Singh, Mithan and Soni came at the spot. They asked Malkiat Singh @ Minta that his driver has broken the tiles by striking the trolley to the pillar of their main gate and caused loss to them and demanded compensation for that. Malkiat Singh @ Mima told them that he is not going to give them any compensation. He sat on this tractor Swaraj Marka 855 and started the same and came in front of their gate, where Malkiat Kaur stopped him and asked him to compensate them for the loss. On hearing this Malkiat Singh asked them to go away from the front of the Tractor and threatened to kill them. Thereafter, Malkiat Singh by accelerating his tractor at a fast speed with an intention to kill her struck her and due to the striking of the front tyre of the tractor, Malkiat Kaur got injured. Her husband Karnail Singh got her admitted to SGL Charitable Mustafabad for treatment.

(2.) The matter was investigated by the police and the challan was presented against the petitioner, whereas the other accused named in the F.I.R. were found innocent.

(3.) After presentation of the challan (Annexure P-2) and framing of charges, the compromise was effected (Annexure P-3). Vide order of this Court dated 26.9.2014, the trial Court was directed to send a report with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise after recording statement of parties and parties were also directed to appear before the trial Court and get their statements recorded with regard to the compromise.