Crl. Misc. No.M-24630 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: December 06, 2010. Crl. Misc. No.M-24630 of 2010. Kulbir Singh and another .. Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab and another. . Respondents *** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI PRESENT Mr.H.N.S.Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Gagan Mohini, AAG., Punjab. Ms.Simranjeet Kaur, Advocate, for respondent No.2. *** M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The petitioners seek the quashing of FIR No.58 dated 10.07.2010, under Sections 279, 427, 341, 323, 148 & 149 IPC, registered at Police Station, Kharar, District Mohali, on the basis of compromise. It appears that in a road rage 5 persons were booked in above said case at the instance of respondent No.2. Two out of the said persons have sought quashing of FIR on the basis of . . . 1 Crl. Misc. No.M-24630 of 2010 compromise. Amarpreet Singh, respondent No.2, present in the Court informs that the matter has actually been compromised. State counsel on the instructions of ASI Jangir Singh informs that there are 5 accused in the present case. Partial quashing of FIR does not seem to be appropriate in the present case. This petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise, by joining the other co-accused. It has been observed that number of petitions for quashing of the FIR are filed on the basis of compromise. Many a times it is not disclosed that few of the accused persons are proclaimed offender. A person who is proclaimed offender is not generally entitled to any indulgence. This fact is also sometimes not disclosed by the State counsel for want of information from the concerned Investigating Officer. In such a situation, a proclaimed offender sometimes may get the order of quashing of FIR. It is also seen that sometimes large number of accused are involved in the FIR but few of the accused enter into compromise with the complainant and file a petition without disclosing that there are other accused involved in the FIR. This fact is sometimes not disclosed by the complainant or the State counsel resulting in miscarriage of justice, as in this manner, some of the accused are able to seek the partial quashing of the FIR making it difficult for the trial Court to proceed against the remaining accused. . . . 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-24630 of 2010 It is also observed that sometimes petition for quashing of FIR is filed, on the basis of compromise, without impleading the actual injured and affected persons. A lot of precious time of the Court is wasted in determining whether any of the petitioners is a proclaimed offender or whether all the accused in the FIR have been made parties and to determine whether any affected or injured person has not been left out. Since the quashing petitions on the basis of compromise are of recent origin on the basis of judgment of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.), Page-1052, it is suggested that the Registry should be directed to get an affidavit from the petitioners along with “a petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise”, certifying: - (i) that none of the petitioners is a proclaimed offender; (ii) that all the accused involved in the FIR have been made party in the petition and in case any person or co-accused is not made a party, specific reason for not impleading them as a party should be disclosed; and (iii) that all the affected persons i.e., injured or otherwise have been impleaded as party in the petition and that there is no other person left to be impleaded as party whose rights are likely to be prejudiced by quashing of FIR. . . . 3 Crl. Misc. No.M-24630 of 2010 In case the above suggestions are approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, necessary directions be issued to the Registry. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE December 06, 2010. rka . . . 4