JUDGMENT

Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral). - This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.35 dated 28.03.2013, registered under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Hoshiarpur, District Hoshiarpur (Section 307 of IPC has been deleted later on and Section 324 of IPC has been added later on) as well as all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction dated 09.01.2019 passed by the Court of Sh. Amit Mallan, PCS, CJM, Hoshiarpur, Punjab (Annexure P-2) on the basis of compromise dated 25.09.2019 (Annexure P- 3), qua the petitioner.

2. On 19.02.2021, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order:-

'Case heard by video conferencing.

By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.35, dated 28.03.2013, registered at Police Station City,

Hoshiarpur, alleging therein the commission of offences punishable under Sections 307/34 of the IPC (with Section 307 deleted and Section 324 of the Code added later), as also all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise (Annexure P-3), arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.2.

Notice of motion be issued to the respondents.

Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice at the asking of the court on behalf of the respondent State, with Mr.Rajesh K. Dadwal, Advocate, appearing for respondent no.2 and accepting notice. He will file a power of attorney duly executed by respondent no.2 in his favour, well before the next date of hearing.

A copy of the petition be e-mailed to them today itself by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no.2 also submits that though in the FIR an offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC was alleged to have been committed, however, subsequently the said offence was deleted on account of the injuries received not found to be dangerous to life.

In such circumstances, the petitioner, as also respondent no.2 would appear before the learned appellate court up to 01.03.2021 to record their statements. That Court would satisfy itself with regard to the authenticity of the compromise and the fact that it has been arrived at without any kind of undue influence or pressure, and would thereafter send its report to this Court, before the next date of hearing.

That Court would also verify whether there is any other person involved in the occurrence, who is not a party to the present petition and whose consent for the compromise would be required, if this Court comes to the conclusion that the FIR sought to be quashed can be so quashed.

The learned State counsel would also verify whether there are any other criminal cases, of like nature or otherwise, pending against the petitioner.

Adjourned to 19.03.2021.

Naturally, learned counsel for the parties would be required to address arguments by citing whatever judgments they wish to rely upon, that the FIR can be quashed even after the petitioner, i.e. the accused, has been convicted by the trial court.

A gazetted officer is also directed to file a reply to the petition.

February 19, 2021 Sd/-(AMOL RATTAN SINGH) JUDGE'

3. In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted by the District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur. The relevant part of the report is reproduced hereinbelow:-

'With reference to the subject cited above, it is submitted that above referred Criminal Appeal is pending in FIR No.35 dated 28.3.2013, under Sections 324/34 IPC, Police Station City, Hoshiarpur, against Karan Bali @ Ashu, and it is fixed for 26.4.2021 for arguments. In this case, accused Harwinder Singh, Arshdeep Singh @ Manny, Karan Bali @ Ashu and Varun Rana were challaned out of which, Arshdeep Singh @ Manny was declared proclaimed person and the trial was faced by Harwinder Singh, Karan Bali @ Ashu and Varun Rana. As per the record of trial court, accused Karan Bali @Ashu was convicted and sentenced under Section 324 IPC read with section 34 I