Crl.Misc.No.M-3144 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-3144 of 2009 Date of Decision: 24 - 2 - 2009 Jasvir Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sartaj Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab. Mr.Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed by Jasvir Singh under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of Complaint No.18 dated 17.5.2007 preferred by respondent No.2 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur wherein petitioner had been summoned to stand trial vide Annexure P-2 under Sections 323, 354 IPC and Section 3(xi) of Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as, `the Act'). A perusal of complaint and the summoning order reveal that respondent No.2 – Balvir Kaur had made a grievance that Jasvir Singh Crl.Misc.No.M-3144 of 2009 [2] accused had an evil eye on the plot purchased by her from one Nachhattar Singh. It is stated that about 15-16 days before the occurrence, Jasvir Singh came along with certain persons and threatened the accused to sell the plot, otherwise the possession of the plot shall be taken forcibly. It is stated that on 7.5.2007, accused Jasvir Singh armed with a firearm along with 4-5 persons came and slapped grandson of the complainant. It was stated that on 8.5.2007, Jasvir Singh called the complainant by her caste and ridiculed her. Thus, it was stated that offence under Sections 323/354 and Section 3 (xi) of the Act has been committed by the petitioner for which he was summoned by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur. Balvir Kaur complainant – respondent No.2 is present in Court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr.Ram Bilas Gupta. An affidavit of Balvir Kaur has also been filed in Court today. Same is taken on record. Mr.Ram Bilas Gupta has drawn my attention to agreement/compromise deed wherein it has been stated that there was a dispute between the parties over the wall of the house of complainant and accused. Due to intervention of respectables, the dispute has been resolved. Balvir Kaur has agreed that the wall shall be commonly shared by the parties and the cases instituted against each other shall be withdrawn. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that petitioner-accused is also a Ravidasia and is a Schedule Caste, therefore, he cannot be prosecuted. Counsel has further stated that since the dispute has been compromised, therefore, the present complaint along with the summoning order be quashed. He has placed reliance on Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. On observations made by this Court that quashing of complaint Crl.Misc.No.M-3144 of 2009 [3] and summoning order wherein accused have been summoned after invoking provisions of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 cannot be quashed as same are against public policy, counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Usha Gupta v. Amir Chand, 2001(1) RCR (Criminal) 788 and Hawa Singh and others v. Bishamber Dayal, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 325 to state that in these two cases where the accused have been prosecuted for offence under the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, prosecution has been quashed. In Usha Gupta's case (supra) a Single Bench of this Court had placed reliance upon Shankuntla Sahni v. Kaushalya Sahni, 1980(1) SCC 63. In Hawa Singh's case (supra) on basis of compromise, FIR was quashed. Since the parties are neighbourers and if present complaint and summoning orders are not quashed, there will be a simmering discontentment in the village. Therefore, taking larger interest of the parties, in view and the ratio of Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), Usha Gupta's case (supra), Hawa Singh's case (supra) and statement made by Balvir Kaur in Court, the impugned complaint and summoning order are quashed. Petition is disposed off. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) February 24, 2008. JUDGE RC