RAJPAL ASTHIR Vs. HARCHARAN SINGH @ GURJIT SOINGH @ GURDIP SINGHAND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2011-8-202
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on August 08,2011

Rajpal Asthir Appellant
VERSUS
Harcharan Singh @ Gurjit Soingh @ Gurdip Singhand Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SABINA, J. - (1.) VIDE this order, the above said two petitions will be disposed of as the Petitioners have sought quashing of the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge dated 5.4.2004, whereby it was ordered that the charges be framed against the Petitioners along with other co -accused.
(2.) AFTER hearing learned Counsel for the Petitioners, I am of the opinion that the present petitions deserve to be allowed.
(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 Harcharan Singh filed a complaint against the Petitioners and Harmel Singh, Ajmer Singh and Harbans Singh under Sections 419, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short). The trial Court vide order dated 2.3.2002 (Annexure P -1) ordered the summoning of accused Harmel Singh, Ajmer Singh and Harbans Singh under Sections 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120 -B Indian Penal Code, 1860. Accused Ajmer Singh was also ordered to be summoned to face the trial under Section 167 Indian Penal Code, 1860. So far as Petitioners Tarlok Singh and Rajpal Asthir are concerned, the trial Court held that there was No. evidence against them that they had either prepared or compared the documents qua mutation No. 13827 and 13828. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred a revision and the Court of revision, vide order dated 5.4.2004 (Annexure P -2) ordered that charges be framed against the present Petitioners. During the course of arguments, it has transpired that accused Harmel Singh, Ajmer Singh and Harbans Singh have since died. Civil litation was also pending between the parties. Civil Suit No. 189 of 18.5.1992 was filed by the complainant against Harmel Singh and Ors. for declaration that he was owner of the land bearing khasra No. 1248 and 1249. During the pendency of the said suit, parties had arrived at a compromise and the suit was disposed of in terms of the compromise. Para 3 of the compromise reads as under: That in view of the compromise, the Plaintiff shall withdraw the criminal proceedings filed by him and shall also be bound to execute all the necessary documents and cooperate in every manner regarding the case registered on the basis of FIR No. 371 dated 14.11.2003 under Sections 419, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120 -B read with Section 140 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the criminal complaint entitled " Harcharan Singh v. Harmel Singh" pending in the court of Sh.J.S.Marok, JMIC, Ludhiana and is fixed for 11.11.2005. the party to the first part shall withdraw/compromise the above mentioned criminal cases and in case consent is required for quashing the same in the Hon'ble High Court. The Plaintiff shall duly cooperate and give its consent in the quashment of the same.;


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