Crl.M. No. M-7056 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M. No. M-7056 of 2009 Date of decision : 11.5.2009. ... Vinod Kumar Sharma and another ................ Petitioners vs. State of Punjab and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. R.K. Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioners. Sh. K.S. Pannu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Sh. Tajender Pal Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. Sh. P.S. Jammu, Advocate for respondent No.3. ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) This is a petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Durga Devi w/o Shivram Sharma, who has stated that she alongwith her husband had been residing on rent in the house of Raj Kumar Lahoria since long. Her husband has since expired and now she was residing at Bhiwani with her relative. On 27.12.2008, at about 9.15 P.M. she came back in her house because she had already given possession of the house to Crl.M. No. M-7056 of 2009 -2- Raj Kumar Lahoria after receiving a draft of Rs.5.50 lacs. As she was owner in possession of the house, she visited the house to take away her household articles and possession of the house was to be given to Raj Kumar Lahoria. It is further stated that she found that her lock was unlocked by her son Vinod Kumar and he prevented her to enter the house. Her articles were not lying there. Smt. Durga Devi is present in Court and has been identified by her counsel Sh. Tajender Pal Singh, Advocate. She has also filed an affidavit to the effect that she has never lodged the FIR. Counsel for respondent No.3 objects the quashing of FIR on the basis of affidavit Annexure P-3. It is contended that cross version has been registered at the statement of respondent No.3. Raj Kumar Lahoria. So, in these circumstances, since Durga Devi do not want to pursue with the FIR, so FIR No. 284 dated 28.12.2008, under Sections 451/341/380/323 IPC registered at P.S. City Kotkapura, District Faridkot, stands quashed. However, it is made clear that Raj Kumar Lahoria – respondent No.3 may continue with his cross version in accordance with law. ( K.C. Puri ) 11.5.2009. Judge chugh