AMARDEEP ALIAS SONU BABA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-2014-2-490
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 18,2014

Amardeep Alias Sonu Baba Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS order will dispose of the above mentioned two criminal miscellaneous petitions i.e. Criminal Misc. No.M -43452 of 2013 filed by Amardeep alias Sonu Baba, Preeti, Kamaljit, Neha Gill, Kamal, Ashu, Toni Khosla, Sagar, Sahil and Gopal under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.250 dated 26.8.2013 for the offences under Sections 452, 354, 323, 148, 149 and 427 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Jalandhar, District Jalandhar City (Annexure -P.1) and Criminal Misc. No.M -40881 of 2013 filed by Neelam, Komal, Dipin and Vipan Kumar for quashing of cross -version registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 452, 427, 148 and 149 IPC in FIR No.250 dated 26.8.2013 (Annexure -P.2) on the basis of compromise.
(2.)THE FIR and cross -version were lodged on the complaints of Neelam and Amardeep alias Sonu Baba respectively against each other as quarrel had taken place in the house of complainant Neelam due to the occupation of the street by the followers of Sonu Baba neighbour of Neelam, who is follower of Peer Baba and people frequently visit his house and sit in the street. Due to this reason, the complainant party in the FIR hardly get any place to cross the street and also get no place to park their scooter. They requested the people visiting Sonu Baba so many times not to sit in the street, but to no avail. In the fight, both the parties have received injuries. Now with the intervention of the respectable persons of both the parties, they have compromised the matter amicably and they do not want to pursue the cases against each other and decided to live peacefully and compromise dated 11.11.2013 has been entered into between them in this regard.
(3.)LEARNED Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar was directed to send report with regard to the genuineness/validity or otherwise of the compromise dated 11.11.2013 and he has verified the same vide his reports dated 5.2.2014 respectively in both the petitions after recording the statements of all the concerned parties. The complainant in both the cases have admitted the factum of compromise with each other. They have also admitted that said compromise was effected without any coercion or pressure and they have no objection if above said FIR and cross -version are quashed.
Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submits that the State would have no objection if the impugned FIR and cross -version and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.