Crl.Misc.No.M-5051 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-5051 of 2010 Date of decision:02.06.2011 Kulwant Singh ..... Petitioner Versus Navdeep Devgon ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr.Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Cheema, Advocate for respondent. Mr.Jagat Pal Singh, Advocate for Mr.Sarju Puri, Advocate. ***** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the complaint No.45/4 dated 11.10.2002, RBT No.176/4 dated 15.04.2004 and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. The brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner was posted as Tehsildar-cum-Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Khanna. Brijlal s/o Sh.Ram Husband of the complainant Partap Kaur was the owner of land measuring 12 kanals and 7 marlas comprised in Khatauni No.94/112 as per the jamabandi for the year 1983-84, situated in village Bullepur No.222, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana. Brij Lal sold that above described land to M/s Partap Iron & Steel Rolling Mills, G.T.Road, Khanna vide registered sale deed No.2104 dated Crl.Misc.No.M-5051 of 2010 -2- 19.11.1985. Brij Lal was also owner of the land measuring 10 kanals and 16 marlas compromised in Khata No.139/163. During his life- time, Brijlal executed a Will dated 25.12.1991 in favour of Partap Kaur who became owner of the land after the death of Brijlal. On the application filed by the M/s Partap Iron & Steel Rolling Mills, Kulwant Singh petitioner entered the mutation No.2222 dated 10.06.1997. But due to inadvertence, kill numbers were wrongly mentioned. After some mistake was deducted and Smt.Partap Kaur (deceased) filed an appeal against sanctioning the mutation No.2222, which was accepted by the SDM, Khanna, District Ludhiana, exercising the power of the Collector and mistake was rectified and revenue record was corrected accordingly. Affidavit of Navdeep Devgon s/o Rajinder Singh r/o H.No.1586/3, Nai Abadi, Khanna, legal representative of Smt.Partap Kaur, complainant, filed in court today is taken on record as Annexure A-1. The complainant is present in person and has been duly identified by his counsel. As per the affidavit, parties have entered into a compromise dated 02.04.2011. The respondent has no objection if the FIR is quashed in the petition pending before this court and the complaint pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khanna. After going through the affidavit and the compromise annexed with the affidavit, this court is of the opinion that the compromise has been effected without any pressure or coercion. As Crl.Misc.No.M-5051 of 2010 -3- per the compromise, the complainant has settled all the dispute with Kulwant Singh, the then Tehsildar, Khanna, Kulwant Singh, the then Halka Patwari, Bullepur, Ram Gopal, Retired Kanungo, Khanna and Sadhu Singh, Namberdar, Bullepur and has no objection if the FIR is quashed. This Court in the case of Parambir Singh Gill v. Malkiat Kaur RCR (Crl) 2010(1) 256 has observed : “Criminal Procedure Code, Section 320- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Sections 3 and 4-Non- compoundable offence-Of the seven accused, complainant entering into compromise with one accused- Proceedings qua one accused only quashed by High Court in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C” Consequently, in view of the judgment in Parambir Singh Gill (supa), Complaint No.45/4 dated 11.10.2002, RBT No.176/4 dated 15.04.2004 and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, qua petitioner only. 02.06.2011 [ RITU BAHRI ] shamsher JUDGE