MALKIAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
LAWS(P&H)-2012-5-476
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on May 02,2012

MALKIAT SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
State of Punjab and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of petitioner, namely, Malkiat Singh, for quashing of F.I.R. No.267 dated 25.09.1983, under Sections 379, 382 and 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Mehna, District Faridkot on the basis of compromise effected between the parties, which is annexed as Annexure P-1 with the petition.
(2.) While issuing notice of motion on 12.03.2012, following order was passed: - ' Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that a compromise has been effected between the parties, which is annexed as Annexure P-1. Learned counsel further submits that initially there were three accused out of which one has been acquitted by the trial Court and the other has been released on probation by the Lower Appellate Court. He further submits that this petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is sole accused now. Notice of motion for 02.05.2012. Notice on behalf of complainantrespondent No.2 has been accepted by Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Advocate, who is present in the Court. Meanwhile, let the statements of the parties be recorded before the trial Court. Parties are directed to be present before the trial Court on 24.03.2012 or any other date convenient to the Court for recording their statements with regard to compromise. The trial Court is directed to record the statements of both the parties to its satisfaction to know its genuineness that the statements are not the result of any pressure or coercion in any manner. The trial Court is directed to send a report along with statements of the parties with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise effected between the parties and also intimate whether any case is pending against either of the parties or not before the next date of hearing. The trial Court is also directed to intimate with regard to pendency of any P.O. proceedings against the parties."
(3.) In response to the said directions issued by this Court, a report in this regard has been sent by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga, which is on record along with the statements of the parties wherein it has been mentioned that the dispute between the parties has been settled by way of compromise and the compromise is without any pressure and undue influence. It has also been mentioned that no other case is pending against either of the parties and no proclaimed offender proceedings are pending. Complainant has specifically stated in his statement that he has no objection in quashing of the FIR.;


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