Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Prem Lal Middha & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of U.T. Chandigarh & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 45806 of 2022
Decided On : 21-12-2022
Compromise - Quashing of FIR - The court disposed of the petition for quashing of FIR based on a compromise-deed between the parties, as the complainants did not appear before the court to support the compromise.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 523, dated 11.09.2013, under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC, based on a compromise-deed between the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition as the complainants did not appear before the court to support the compromise, with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition when all aggrieved persons come forward to support the compromise.
Issues: Non-appearance of complainants to support the compromise.
Ratio Decidendi: The court cannot proceed with the petition for quashing of FIR when the complainants do not support the compromise.
Final Decision: The petition for quashing of FIR was disposed of with liberty to file a fresh petition when all aggrieved persons come forward to support the compromise.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J. - Vide order dated 30.09.2022, a coordinate Bench of this Court had passed the following order:-
'The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 523, dated 11.09.2013, under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station (South) Sector 34, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1), and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise-deed dated 16.05.2022 (Annexure P-2), effected between the parties.
Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Addl. PP, UT Chandigarh, appears in Court and submits that there are total 06 complainant/victims in the present case, however, only one complainant/victim has been made party in the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a short adjournment to clear the issue.
Adjourned to 14.12.2022.'
2. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainants are not appearing before the concerned Court to support their compromise and they have resiled therefrom.
3. Given above, the present petition cannot proceed further and is disposed of. In the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file an appropriate petition as and when all the aggrieved persons come forward to support the compromise effected between the parties. It is clarified that disposal of the present petition shall not come in the way of the petitioners in case of filing a fresh petition.
The court invoked its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on the compromise between the accused and the aggrieved person, considering th....
The court has the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings where a compromise has been effected, in order to prevent the abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to quash proceedings based on a compromise between the parties, in order to prevent abuse of process of law and secure the ends o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
