CRM No. M-4909 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-4909 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.11.2009 Kuldip Singh & others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & others ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. R.P. Daaria, Advocate for Mr. Ravi Kapur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, AAG, Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. Gauravjit Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Rajan Gupta, J (oral). This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the FIR bearing No.285 dated 10th December, 2007, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 427, 506, 448, 511, 120-B IPC, registered against the petitioners at Police Station Model Town, Ludhiana, on the basis of a compromise stated to have been arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and thus FIR in question deserves to be quashed. Learned counsel for the State (on the instructions from ASI CRM No. M-4909 of 2009 2 Baljinder Singh, who is present in court) has, however, vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR. He has stated that allegations against the petitioners are that they, in criminal conspiracy with each other, forged the sale-deed in the name of one Dharam Chand and petitioner No.1 regarding property No.191-R, situated in Model Town, Ludhiana. Even the stamp papers used for execution of sale deed were found to be forged. This property in fact belongs to Gulshan Kumar Arora and his brother Satish Kumar Arora. Learned counsel has pointed out that Dharam Chand is a fake person and his whereabouts could not be known, so, he could not be traced during the course of investigation. This apart, the petitioners further entered into an agreement to sell this property to Baljinder Singh, petitioner No.4, in the presence of one Harvinder Singh, who also could not be traced during investigation. According to the counsel, the offences alleged in the FIR are against the public policy and thus, there is no ground to quash the FIR on the basis of compromise. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. There are allegations of cheating and forgery in the FIR. Even documents, such as stamp papers are said to have been forged. This apart, it has been pointed out by the State counsel that the matter is still under investigation. The averment that compromise has been arrived at between the parties, is of no avail in view of the nature of offence alleged. CRM No. M-4909 of 2009 3 Under the circumstances, no ground is made out for quashing of the FIR, at this stage. Dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE November 03, 2009 'rajpal'