-1- [CASE NUMBER] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] Date of decision: 21.5.2015 [ENTITY] Petitioner Versus [ENTITY] and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: - Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. [ENTITY], DAG, Punjab. [ENTITY], J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed by the petitioner under [SECTION] of the [ACT], seeking quashing of case FIR No.300 dated 15.11.2013 registered under [SECTION] [ACT] at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathinda, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 05.12.2013 (Annexure P-2) between the parties.
On 22.01.2015 parties were directed to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise/settlement and trial Court was directed to send the report.
In pursuance of order dated 22.01.2015, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda, has submitted report dated 20.02.2015, which indicates that parties appeared before learned Magistrate and got [CASE NUMBER] recorded their respective statements with regard to validity of compromise. As per the report, compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion from any corner. Learned counsel for the parties state that now no dispute survives between the parties.
Consequently, in view of the compromise and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. [ENTITY], 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, [PRECEDENT] v. [ENTITY] and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, Narinder Singh and others v. [ENTITY] and another, 2014(2) RCR (Criminal) 482 and Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. [ENTITY] and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation, especially when this case does not fall within the category of exceptional cases where this Court should not exercise its inherent jurisdictional power to quash the criminal proceedings, as held in [PRECEDENT]'s case (supra). In the facts and circumstances of this case it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, therefore, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end.
The present petition is allowed. FIR No.300 dated 15.11.2013 registered under [SECTION] [ACT] at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathinda, along with all consequential proceedings arising out of it, on [CASE NUMBER] the basis of compromise, is quashed.
It is, however, made clear that if the proceedings already stand concluded and conviction recorded in the present case, this order shall be treated non est and, thus, will have no bearing on the conviction and sentence order.
([ENTITY]) Judge May 21, 2015 R.S.