Crl. Misc. No. M-8681 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-8681 of 2011 Date of decision : 7.9.2011 Jaswant Singh & others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. S.K. Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Yatharth Hans, Advocate for respondent No.2. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.142 dated 21st June, 2007 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 379, 447 & 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. On the last date of hearing, following order was passed by this court (Daya Chaudhary, J.) :- “The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, namely, Jaswant Singh, Jagjit Singh @ Jagga, Harpreet Singh @ Happy, Santokh Singh @ Bhola, Shingara Singh, Baljinder Singh and Kuldeep Singh @ Manak for quashing of FIR No.142 dated 21st June, 2007 under Sections 379/447/506 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur on the basis of compromise annexed as Annexure P-2 with the petition. Notice of motion for 23.5.2011. Mr. Yatharth Hans, Advocate, who is present in Court, Crl. Misc. No. M-8681 of 2011 2 accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Meanwhile, the parties are directed to be present before the trial Court on 8.4.2011 or any other date convenient to the Court for recording statements of the parties. 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 also directed to send statements of the parties along with a report with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise effected between the parties or whether any case is pending against either of the parties or not before the next date of hearing.” In compliance with the aforesaid order, a report along with certified copies of statements of the parties has been received from the trial court (Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur). In its report, the trial court has observed as under:- “Statement of Sohan Singh complainant and Nirmal Singh witness recorded on 8.4.2011. They have stated that with the intervention of respectables of the village and in order to keep healthy atmosphere in the village, they have effected compromise with the accused persons namely Jaswant Singh, Jagjit Singh, Harpreet Singh, Santokh Singh, Shingara Singh, Baljinder Singh and Kuldeep Singh, residents of village Lohgarh, Tehsil and District Ferozepur. The compromise has been entered by them voluntarily out of their free will, without any inducement, threat, pressure and coercion. Now they have no grudge against the accused persons and they do not want to proceed further with the present case and have no objection if the FIR No.142 dt. 21.6.2007 U/s 379/447/506 IPC, P.S. Sadar Ferozepur is quashed. Statement of petitioners namely Jaswant Singh, Jagjit Singh, Santokh Singh, Baljinder Singh, Kuldeep Singh, residents of village Lohgarh, Tehsil and District Ferozepur have also been recorded on the same day by this court. In their statements, they have also confirmed about the Crl. Misc. No. M-8681 of 2011 3 compromise effected between the parties. From the statements of the petitioners and respondents it is quite evident that the compromise effected between the parties appears to be genuine and correct one. Attested copies of statement of the parties recorded by this court are sent herewith for kind perusal.” Learned State counsel submits that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, the State would not stand in the way of quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of the above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR ( Crl.) 1052. FIR was registered in the year 2007, pursuant whereto investigation ensued and trial commenced. Thus, costs of proceedings need to be imposed. The present petition is, thus, allowed and FIR and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- as costs to be remitted to the State Legal Services Authority, Punjab. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 7.9.2011 'rajpal'