Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 And 1 Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. 1. Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 Harinder Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Another …Respondents AND 2. Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 Harinder Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Another …Respondents Date of Decision: 4.5.2011 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Satwant Singh Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr. H.S. Tuli, Advocate for respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) By this common order, both the petitions viz. Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 titled as “Harinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 And 2 Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 Another” filed for quashing of order dated 26.7.2008 declaring the petitioner as a Proclaimed Offender passed in the Criminal Complaint filed by respondent No.2-Surmukh Singh and No. M-12344 of 2011 titled as “Harinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Another”, filed for quashing of a Criminal Complaint (Annexure P1), filed by respondent No.2-Surmukh Singh, shall be dealt with. The facts of the case shall be gathered from Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011. Surmukh Singh, complainant/respondent No.2, who is present in this Court along with his counsel, had filed a complaint against three persons namely Bhupinder Singh and his two sons Harinder Singh and Narinder Singh. Harinder Singh is the petitioner before this Court. The above said complaint was filed for the offence under Sections 323, 342, 506, 452, 295-A, 379 and 34 IPC. The three accused named in the complaint including the petitioner were summoned to stand trial by the trial Court vide its order dated 29.1.2008 (Annexure P2). Bhupinder Singh and Narinder Singh appeared before the trial Court. However, service of summons could not be effected upon the petitioner. It will be pertinent to mention here that the Summoning Court came to a specific conclusion that the offence under Sections 295-A, 342, 379 and 452 IPC is not made out and the offence made out against the petitioner falls under Sections 323, 506 and 34 IPC. It is not disputed that these two offences are compoundable without permission of the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the report dated 7.6.2008 (Annexure P5) to submit that it was reported by the Court staff that service of summons could not be effected upon Harinder Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 And 3 Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 Singh as he had gone abroad. Learned counsel further submits that even knowing fully well that the petitioner had gone abroad, he was declared as a Proclaimed offender. It is further submitted that vide judgment dated 20.10.2010 (Annexure P8), father and brother of the petitioner were acquitted of the charges by the trial Court. It is further submitted that during the pendency of proceedings against the petitioner, who was declared as Proclaimed offender, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. It is urged that the petitioner and complainant are residents of same village and in order to promote everlasting peace, amity and harmony, they have buried their hatchet and have brought the feud to an end. It is further submitted that this Court, taking into consideration the mandate of law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, should quash the proceedings. Surmukh Singh, complainant/respondent No.2, is present in this court, who has been identified by Mr. H.S. Tuli, Advocate. Vide a separate Miscellaneous Application, reply has been filed wherein the factum of compromise has been admitted. Having noticed the broad features of the case, this Court cannot ignore the fact that the petitioner was declared as Proclaimed Offender. Therefore, at first instance, he has to bow before the Majesty of the Court and thereafter his prayer for quashing of complaint and summoning order on the basis of compromise can be considered even though the offences are very minor in nature falling under Sections 323 Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 And 4 Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 and 506 IPC and are compoundable without the permission of the Court. Therefore, this Court shall keep the quashing petition viz. Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 pending to see the conduct of the petitioner, however, the quashing petition viz. Criminal Misc. No. M-11373 of 2011 is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner surrenders before the trial Court, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Criminal Misc. No. M-12344 of 2011 shall be taken up for hearing on 16.5.2011. A copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 4, 2011 “DK”