- (1.) This judgment of mine will dispose of two cases i.e. Crl. Misc. Nos. M-2976 and 3003 of 2014 as it is a case of version and cross-version. Crl. Misc. No. M-2976 of 2014 has been filed by petitioners, namely, Lakhvir Singh, Harnek Singh @ Balli, Dalwinder Singh @ Binder and Harchetan Singh @ Chetan for quashing of FIR No. 72 dated 10.5.2011 registered under Sections 323,324,341,506,148,149 IPC at Police Station Sadar Ludhiana, District Ludhiana, whereas, Crl. Misc. No. M-3003 of 2014 has been filed by petitioners, namely, Manpreet Singh @ Doggar, Narangjit Singh, Parminder Singh @ Pohli, Lovpreet Singh and Gaganpreet Singh @ Gurjant Singh @ Janti for quashing the cross-case registered in the aforesaid FIR vide DDR No. 27 dated 12.5.2011 under Sections 324,323,506,148,149 IPC at Police Station Sadar Ludhiana, District Ludhiana. During the pendency of the proceedings, a compromise was effected between the parties with the intervention of the respectables and elders. Now both the parties have settled their dispute and have no grudge against each other.
(2.) Learned counsel for the parties submit that all the persons are residents of the same village and they want to lead a happy and peaceful life and are not interested in continuation of the proceedings against each other in the FIR as well as in cross-version case. They have also no objection in quashing of the FIR as well as cross-case. Learned counsel further submits that parties are not habitual offenders as no other case is pending against them. The purpose of compromise is to maintain good relations and harmony as they want to lead a peaceful life. While issuing notice of motion on 27.1.2014, both the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements. The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to send a report after recording the statements of the parties to know whether the compromise between the parties is without any pressure from either side or the same is as per their free will. In compliance of the directions issued by this Court, both the parties appeared before the trial Court and their statements with regard to compromise were recorded. A report in this regard has also been received from trial Court, wherein, factum of compromise has been affirmed. It has also been mentioned in the report that the compromise is as per free will of the parties and they do not have any objection in quashing of the FIR as well ascross-version.
(3.) In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served in case proceedings are continued as it would amount to wastage of precious time of the Court as the complainant is not going to support the case of the prosecution and as such continuation of proceedings would be futile exercise.;