The main legal point established in the judgment is that offences under Section 307 IPC are to be treated as crimes against society and not against an individual alone, and the power to quash an FIR is permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and charge sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial.

JUDGMENT

Jaishree Thakur, J. - The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') for quashing of the FIR No. 73 dated 18.5.2020, under Sections 307, 324, 506, 355/34 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, primarily on the basis of a compromise having been arrived at between the parties.

2. In brief, the facts as stated are that the above mentioned FIR came to be registered at the behest of the complainant-Tirath Singh son of Baldev Singh-respondent No.2 herein, stating that he and his family members along with his uncle Gurmej Singh son of Darshan Singh and Sukhdev Singh son of Darshan Singh, are jointly residing in one house. There was a dispute regarding partition of the house with Gurmej Singh. On 11.5.2020 at around 9 a.m., the complainant had gone to his field for bringing fodder when Gurmej Singh, his son Gagandeep Singh, (armed with kirpan and knife respectively), daughter Ranjit Kaur and wife Harjinder Kaur (both empty handed) were standing at the Tubewell. Gurmej Singh raised a lalkara stating that a lesson should be taught for seeking partition of the house. Gagandeep Singh inflicted a knife blow which hit on the the chest towards left side of the complainant and when he tried to run away, Ranjit Kaur and Harjinder Kaur caught hold of him by hair and Gurmej Singh gave a kirpan blow on his chest towards right side and Gagandeep Singh gave another knife blow which hit on his right biceps. On account of the injuries inflicted, the complainant became unconscious and his father thereafter took him to the Civil Hospital, Ferozepur, where he remained admitted for 20 days on account of the injuries inflicted and thus the FIR came to be registered.

3. Subsequent to the filing of the FIR, a compromise dated 14.8.2020 was arrived at between the parties with the intervention of the village respectables and it was decided that both the parties would live in peace and harmony in future. It was also agreed that cross-case registered bearing No. Rapat No. 33 dated 20.5.2020 regarding the injuries received by Gurmej Singh and his family would be cancelled and so would the FIR.

4. In support of the petition seeking quashing of the FIR, an affidavit dated 14.8.2020 has also been filed by the complainant wherein he has averred that he would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, while further affirming that in case his statement is needed before the police or the court, he would be bound to give statement in favour of the accused in the said FIR.

5. Pursuant to the filing of the petition, the parties were directed by order dated 29.10.2020 to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate concerned for recording their statement regarding genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. Before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur, the complainant, namely, Tirath Singh son of Baldev Singh stated that he has effected the compromise with the petitioners voluntarily with the intervention of the respectable of the locality and he would have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. Similarly, the accused under the FIR also recorded their statement to the effect that they have compromised with Tirath Singh-complainant. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur, in his report, has opined that the statements of the parties are bonafide and are not result of any pressure or coercion etc. and the compromise effected between the parties is genuine and valid.

6. However, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that even though the matter stands compromised and the statements have been recorded, the FIR cannot be quashed in view of the judgment rendered by a three Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, (2019) 5 SCC 688. Learned counsel has produced legal medico report, wherein the doctor has opined that the injuries 1, 3 and 4 sustained by the complainant are dangerous and