Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATWINDER SINGH & ORS versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SATWINDER SINGH & Ors v. STATE OF PUNJAB & Anr - CRM-48281-M-2003 [2006] RD-P&H 3601 (4 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl.M. No.48281-M of 2003

DATE OF DECISION: 5.7.2006

SATWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ......PETITIONERS VERSUS

THE STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS ......RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
Present: Mr. S.S. Hira, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. B.S. Baath, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Jyoti Sareen, Advocate for respondent No.2.

JUDGEMENT

* * *

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.165 dated 27.7.2003 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur on the basis of a compromise/settlement Annexure P-2 and an affidavit filed by the complainant Annexure P-7.

Counsel for the petitioners contends that even prior to the lodging of the FIR, the parties had resolved their differences and the petitioners had paid some money towards the amount due. However as there was a default in payment by the petitioners, respondent No.2 lodged the present FIR. After lodging of the FIR, the parties once again resolved their differences pursuant to a compromise/agreement reflected in the affidavit dated 19.8.2003 duly sworn by the complainant. In the said affidavit, the complainant has acknowledged the receipt of the entire amount and has also deposed that he has no objection, if the present FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Counsel for respondent No.2 does not deny the aforementioned fact. He submits that respondent No.2 has no objection, if the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as parties have resolved their differences and as the offences complained of are compoundable with the permission of Court, he has no objection, if the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. It is not denied that prior to the lodging of the FIR and vide settlement ( Annexure P-2) parties had settled their differences.

Annexure P-2 sets down the schedule of payment requires to be made by the petitioners. It is not denied that as the petitioners defaulted in the payment of the aforementioned amount, the complainant lodged the present FIR and thereafter, the complainant received the entire amount, that was payable to him and as a consequence whereof swore an affidavit dated 19.8.2003 Annexure P-7. Relevant extract of the affidavit is reproduced as follows:

"1. That I have received whole of the amount which was due from Harwinder Paul son of Shankar Dass resident of Kothi No.3205 Sector 45-D, Chandigarh.

2. That I have received the amount through Bank Draft Number DE-91365782 and DE-91365783 dated 16.8.2003 for Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.82,000/- respective favouring ICICI Bank Limited Jalandhar which are in the shape of account payee in the name of my son Iqbal Singh.

3. That now I have no grudge/grouse against Satwinder Singh, Gurnam Singh sons of Resham Dass and Usha Rani wife of Satwinder Singh of Village Kandhala Jattan, P.S. Tanda, Tehsil Dasuya District Hoshiarpur and Harwinder Paul son of Shankar Dass.

4. That I have got no objection if the proceedings in FIR No.165 of 27.7.2003 under Sections 406, 420, 120- B IPC in P.S. Tanda are quashed or cancelled by the Hon'ble Court."

Counsel for the State as also counsel for the complainant have not denied the correctness of the aforementioned facts. In fact as noticed hereinabove, counsel for the complainant has prayed that the FIR be quashed.

In view of the facts noticed hereinabove as also the fact that the offences complained of are compoundable with the prior permission of the Court, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.165 dated 27.7.2003 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC at Police Station Tanda District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

July 5, 2006 (RAJIVE BHALLA)

ps JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.