+ \Q3 p567@ A w XI—HC—78 ’ FgwPwgggL‘HE 209 g’ mm (Wu) iWrQ 9eii€§an under Awide 225.!22? 0f the Cow3iitutmn a? ind§a) $mg§a Benda: Henibés $h2‘i Emmndm Mishm, J. 3‘3-29§3$:- $hri Jitendra Paii, counsel for i’ne pei‘atimer. 3M Vinay Hatit} Qepxy Advccate Genera! far the Staief ’ re$pondent$ Maj is 4. WWW warawa‘w, Wawfram >$WW$$$§W. . . PETéTIONER: Hamm KnaE, A v 55 Sio Ta} Khan Katmboda years, maugatmn Landed Preperty Sewer, Rio Saket Caieny, PS. Mahan Nagar, Durg, Tah‘ 8:. D§stt Burg. -K’ersus— RE39GNDENTS 4 State of Chhaéiésgam, Through Seci’etaw of Home Bepartment, Secretariat, DK,$. Shastri Chouk, 'X} Raipur. "' Erector Geneyal i3oiise: Poéme Head Quarter, Ra‘gmr {CG} 3‘ Superm‘tsndent a? Poke] SyP‘ Office 4‘ Staiion House inspector (172‘) w Poiice 3iatian Eurg ‘ 3‘ Shri NR. Ja§swai Aged about 45 years, S/c Shri K? 3aiswai, REC) 4? Mohan Nagar, Durg. Teh. 8; / v Disti. Bum (CG) XI-H€—78 \Qw mmm amwa’wm mW 209 mm (Wu) W am arm f0? ‘L Shr§ RK. Paii, caunsei for Heard. The pet§t§aner has fi§ed quashing 0f prgceedmgs aga sffance puwghame under Se $3093 42:3, 467 and 468 <3? the LPG registered at RS. Surg on fihe c mgiamt 0f respandent N95 Leamed counsel for the peétioner submitted that the afore$a§d gaffenca was registemd on th compiaint of respondant N95 dated ¢2-9-2&3G5 wherein he had ai§e ed that he purchased the dkaiouted kand f‘rem we Baib‘w $§ngh fey a ca dei'ation 0f Re.aO,DOO/- v§de s‘egEteyed seie deed of Annexure-PIQ. T e pee‘iienef s§§ned the eheve sa§e deed as witne$$, $hersaf%e{ ihe same pewer cf attorney he§de¥ cf OA e Smt.’Mam§eet Kaer ta ene Chhaeééai Sajendra far a cens§deret§orz f R334§QGE~ en w“ Septembey, 21304 {Amwexure-PM} WWW ‘?€€TW $W3TI€¥T respondent Ne.5v The mam repert eubmgited by the Reve gubserguem‘sy, me pev‘iéener app3§ed for demareaeom befere the edéé§t§ena§ Cewecier and en the :ie5'wbgd m de$crabed m 35!? 'M 2-2QQ8‘ land wee egam ee§d by me petiimner as iedged en Le bas§e ef dewerceeen e mspeemr {Annexure—F’J?). Howevei“, e? ef me AddétEena§ Soiéectos“, me and ihe eaée deed 3f Annexufe-Pfm’; as weu ee the §am£$ %%aa saha deed The Aesista 2 Supermiencient Land Recs-hi; in hie demematian reper‘a hae mange ed that the iande said ihmugh bath the gaie deeds are eai§¥e¥y eifeyen? The compgaihanweeeendeni NeS hae the instant petition and prayed fer lt him under Crime NQ876QO¥35 fer, f Amexwe-F‘l9 \A'efe demameted an in e w n n i ‘ s w , mam 3211mm a a Jk/ ,A. V5 WW m zoo WW (Wu) J; akeady ohtaéned passessmn o1 wbseqgent demarcatian of ihe have entered mm v??? m3! %a¥‘l‘?m&n%§r the purchased {and i \ §and ‘m d§spme, the petitioner and the ’( wmpiamam m v§ew of the o a compromise and executed a compremise deed 0n 28m Aug st; 2008. The somge!a§nan€ has aiscr swem affidawt of Anenxure-Pi1 3 in support <3? compromise deeo. $m NR. Ja§swa§ siated befora ih§s mm that he has signed the compromise deed of his own free vo§iiion We comp§ainant and the peti$§oner we preoent m pea'gon. wi He haS ais’eadyobiained pos Wough sa§e dead of Annexure-‘ 19. o v§ew of ihe abovo oomp omisej he does not intsnrj to owwe his oompmént agamst tho pefmoner any further ano he has no objection i§ oi’ime reg§siemc§ agamst ihe :oe‘tit ohe¥ s quashed. teamed counse? foe the p t§t§oner sLsom§ticed *ihat ’though offeneee pumehebie uoder $eet§one 4 7. am; 4&8 of the IPC ere non— compoundabie, howeyer, prose ukéoo of the pefEtiooer may be queehed i3“. exercise of pewers under the pen‘Eee. Re§ianoe §e p§ace ’ in the mai%er of i1anej Sharma Vs. St te and Om}. ‘ Leamed oounee§ aepearng for respondeot N05 es weii ‘ae ieamee counsei' for the Staie a oée 226 of ihe Constitution of indie in view of toe oompmm§se beiwe ' MANUI’SC/S’i 22/2068 submitted that since the pames have o mmewm ow. any undue infhjence oa’ oreeeure. sgon of tLe §and purofoased by him n . s i A e § h .s w; Wm?.mmm.f m 200 . mm'wwa) mm mwm wxé. 1 Wmgggm h msehled the déwute, wh§ch s civi§ in natwe, thmugh amicable compmmise, the cgmpmmise e iered éntc between the gariie$ niay be accepted and criminal prosee ings agaimt the petiticmer may be gaiaghed‘ § have head ieamed co nsei far the parties“ l have aEsa gene ihmugh :he comgummise deed e cumd by the pgti‘acner am resfoondant lv No5, which is aiso suppartad by the affidavit of fesgmndent No.5 i have q aigo pem$ed the demarsatign apart 9f Annexure—P!“ submkmd by Ass§stam Supermtendemt of Lan Recmd. in éhe mater of warm? n harma (Supra; the Hon’bie $upre1’ee Cam whee sensidering ihe qee. me whezher the Wet mformatwn seem made? Seeiiens 421’}, 4%, 431, :3 aed mall-B a? the IPC sea be quashed eithe: under Seetien 482 of 2h (3:196. er under Artide 226 01F the \ : Cen‘ikmiee ef meiia has ebeeme thus:— "8, in aw View, t‘e High i3eurt’s mesa! t0 exemiee iie jurisdic me unde? Artic§e 226 e the Cenetitet§en fer . qeaehmg the criminai E _ prceeedings canno be supported. The Hrsi i mforma’eonRepo-rt, y’vhich had been éedged by the indécelles 5 Gammaineet a dispete betweee the cempEainant and the; accused which Ee of e private neéurex 3t ie no' doubt {we that the F3rs2§// ~—~- . . ; A /” ,/ m 20c mm (my WWW ammm Em Hfga m y.§; ‘ W m‘r k2}m %aif?r=ml%¥r 2‘“\‘u’ 3' mermaiion Regen was the ba$§s of th investigation by the F’olice authorities; but the dEspute between we parties remained one Qf a persena! na‘iure. Cnce the compiainant decided not t0 pursue the “matter further, the High Gear: same have taken :a mere pragmatic View of me maiiee We do n91 suggest thei whE§e exemsing its ,eewere under Amwe 226 0f the Senstimi‘aee the High Com couid not have {efused te quash ihe First mformetrm Reeert, but whet we de say u is that the matter td have been eenetdered by the High (30m greater pregmattem tn the tecte cf the c As we have indieeted herein’eetere, the e eretee 0f pewer undet Sectéon 432 CrPE‘ er rate 22$ 0f the Conetttutien ts dteeretienary te be exereised in the faete ef each (.356. $1 eerusat of attegeti ne of the First tntermetten Report, it ts Frem evtdent that the dtepute betvv en the cemptainent aed the accused is private n nature it ateo app'ere that Confusion regarding identity of eeejeot mettet' at the tend of 2 ate'deede has etreedy been resetved by ettbsequent demateetton and eettted the dtspute between them thereeft . the parttes have amioebty e wh a. e A i ‘\gg WW; m, W' mm..» w 2Q0 mW~<W>' ‘ mmm “é anéawgfww ammm WW1§WW $ai’E'qm am of the opinim tha? when the , ursue the mat‘Eer any furthea ht §$ a f? *mina! praceeaéngs m Ban/e hw— Wvyeg’am ,‘ .., _ ,V , in View of {he above, camp§a§namt has decided not to Qas% tax quash First lnformatio: Report and or, a? pcwe¥s undei' Artéce 226 of the Canaiitutmm c?" End§a, as axemis3 continuing criminai proceieding \A (Md be an exem'Ese in futi§ity. Aémrdingsy, the petmen aggmst é‘he petitmner undey Swims 420, 457 and 463 a: 2w i3 aucwed and cy'aménai proceeding ‘Crme §\$a.8?6/2005 registeyed under‘ HPC is hereby quaaV / .wmq»w¢mwmamV “F