ANOOP CHITKARA
Baldev Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 117 | 20.11.2010 | Qadian, District Gurdaspur | 307/34 IPC |
The petitioner(s), arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victim(s).
2. The gist of the allegations against the petitioner(s) is that the complainant (respondent No.2) made a statement before the police and based on that statement, the police registered the FIR captioned above. Needless to mention all the details and it is sufficient to say that the parties have entered into a compromise.
3. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-5. After that, the petitioner(s) came up before this Court to quash the FIR.
4. On the prayer of the parties in the present petition, the Court had permitted the parties to appear before the concerned Court to record their statements. As per the concerned C
Shakuntala Sawhney v Kaushalya Sawhney
Ram Prasad v State of Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Babu v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Dimpey Gujraj v Union Territory
State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat
Narinder Singh &Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors.
State of Maharashtra vs. Vikram Anantrai Doshi
Parbatbhai Aahir v State of Gujarat
Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association v State of Himachal Pradesh
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.