- (1.) As identical points of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated two cross petitions for quashing the FIR (Annexure P1), on the basis of compromise, by virtue of this common judgment in order to avoid the repetition in this respect.
(2.) The epitome of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions and emanating from the record, is that, on 30.6.2006 at about 8.30 PM, complainant Nachhatar Singh respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant") was present in his house. In the meantime, some body called him. As soon as, he opened the door of his house, then, petitioners-accused alongwith Harwinder Singh son of Bhupinder Singh came there and caught hold of him. They forcibly entered, broken the glasses of the house and started hurling abuses. According to the prosecution that the accused also gave slaps, fists and brick bats blows and caused injuries to the complainant. On the basis of aforesaid allegations and in the wake of statement of the complainant, a criminal case was registered against the petitioners-accused alongwith their other co-accused namely, Harwinder Singh, by means of FIR No.212 dated 1.7.2006 (Annexure P1) on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323, 324, 380, 427 and 452 read with Section 149 IPC by the police of Police Station Bagha Purana, District Moga in the manner described hereinbefore.
(3.) The police found Harwinder Singh, co-accused of the petitioners, as innocent and he was not challaned. However, it submitted the final police report under section 173 Cr.PC against the petitioners-accused only, that too, under Sections 323, 324 and 427 read with Section 34 IPC.;