IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-1565 of 2009 Date of decision: 24th February, 2009 Inderjit Singh and another … Petitioners Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and another … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. J.S. Bagga, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Preetpal, APP for U.T. Chandigarh. Mr. Anil Shukla, Advocate for respondent No.2. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Mr. Anil Shukla, at the outset has stated that on February 17, 2009, complainant was present in Court, when adjournment slip was circulated by the counsel for the State. He has stated that he can make a statement at bar that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and the amount of Rs.1,68,000/- has been paid to the complainant and he no longer wishes to continue with the present FIR. Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Jagdish Chander, has stated that factum of compromise is not in his knowledge. In view of this, trial Court is directed to record statement of the complainant, before proceeding with the trial, as to whether compromise has been arrived at between the parties or not. In case, complainant states that compromise has been effected and order to this effect has been passed by the trial Court, petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Criminal Misc. No. M-1565 of 2009 Court for quashing of the FIR by annexing the statement made by the complainant in the trial Court along with the order passed by the trial Court. With these observations, present petition is disposed off. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 24, 2009 rps 2