CRM-M 26372 of 2009 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M 26372 of 2009 Date of Decision: 23.10.2009 Paramjit ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Punjab and another ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Ms.Sushma Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat, AAG Punjab for the respondent/State. Mr.G.S.Nahel, Advocate for Mr.N.P.S.Mann, Advocate for the complainant/respondent No.2. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short `Cr.P.C') for quashing of FIR No.204 dated 15.11.97 under Sections 324/148/149 IPC registered at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar and all the consequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise (Annexure P-3) as well as on the basis of acquittal of the other co-accused by the Court of Sh.M.K.Bedi vide order dated 5.11.2001 (Annexure P-2). Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that five persons were named in the FIR, namely, Gurdip Singh, Baljinder Singh, Paramjit Singh, Pakhar and Boora who were tried in a Criminal Case No.122/1/97 and all the aforesaid accused persons except for the petitioner who was abroad,were acquitted by the Court of Sh.M.K.Bedi, JMIC Nakodar. It is further CRM-M 26372 of 2009 -2- submitted that now a compromise has been effected between the petitioner and the complainant as Nirmal Singh has filed an affidavit (Annexure P-3) dated 9.9.2009 to the effect that he does not want to take any legal action against the petitioner. Notice of motion was issued pursuant to which Sh.G.S.Nahel, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of Sh.N.P.S.Mann, Advocate, who has already filed short affidavit of complainant Nirmal Singh dated 25.9.2009. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that on 25.9.2009, the complainant was present in Court and his statement was recorded separately in which he accepted the fact of compromise. Counsel for the State, on instructions received from HC Sarwan Singh, has also stated that they have verified from the complainant about the compromise, who appeared before the SHO, P.S.Shahkot on 7.10.2009 and stated that compromise as alleged by the petitioner, has been entered into between them. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though Section 324 IPC is neither provided under Section 320(1) Cr.P.C. nor Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C. yet the matter can be compounded in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. After hearing the counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the parties belong to same village and have already resolved the dispute, therefore, by invoking jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the present petition is allowed and FIR No.204 dated 15.11.97 under Sections 324/148/149 IPC registered at Police Station Shahkot, CRM-M 26372 of 2009 -3- District Jalandhar and all the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 23.10.2009 Judge Meenu