ANOOP CHITKARA
Ajay Bansal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
226 | 20.06.2019 | Pinjore, District Panchkula | 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 and 120-B IPC |
1. The petitioner, arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, has come up before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved person.
2. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the aggrieved person have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.
3. After that, the petitioner came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, impleading the aggrieved person as respondent.
4. On 29-04-2022, the aggrieved person Sheemu Bansal, (R-2) stated before the SDJM, Kalka and stated that there would be no objection if the court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 29-04-2022, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat.
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5. Despite the severe opposition of the State's counsel to this compromise, the following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -
a) The accuse
C.B.I., New Delhi vs. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd., Calcutta
Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Jagjit Singh
Gold Quest International Private Limited vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association v State of Himachal Pradesh
Jayrajsinh Digvijaysingh Rana vs. State of Gujarat
Narinder Singh &Ors. vs. State of Punjab &Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 466
Parbatbhai Aahir v State of Gujarat
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.