Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. J.S. Arora, DAG Punjab. Ms. Hakikat S.Grewal, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Pankaj Jain, J. (Oral)

By way of present petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No. 0042 dated 27.03.2023 registered under Sections 506 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Chhatiwind, District Amritsar Rural and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

2. On 15.09.2023, the following order was passed:

"The present petition has been moved invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C by the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No.0042 dated 27.03.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 506 IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act, at Police Station Chattiwind, District Amritsar Rural.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter already stands compromised vide Annexure P-2.

Notice of motion for 05.12.2023.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Mr. Hakikat S. Grewal, Advocate appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. and admits the fact of there being a compromise between the parties.

In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before learned Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 05.10.2023. On their doing so, the learned Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall record their statements and furnish its report to this Court by the next date of hearing on the following aspects:-

A copy of the report be also sent to the Registrar Judicial of this Court.

Needless to say that in case for any reason the statements are not recorded on the aforesaid date, the learned Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall be at liberty to call the parties on any other date but not later than a week thereafter."

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 10.11.2023 from Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows:-

"1. It is humbly submitted that in compliance of the order dated 15.09.2023 passed in case referred above by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, this Court recorded the statement of Sucha Singh (complainant) along-with the statement of petitioner/accused person namely Amritpal Singh, with regard to the compromise.

2. The complainant was identified by Sh. Varinder Singh, Advocate and the accused person was identified by the counsel Sh. Harkirat Singh Advocate. Both the parties to the case have suffered statements that with the intervention of the respectable persons, they have voluntarily entered into a compromise without any undue influence, coercion or force; out of their free will.

3. Moreover, this court also recorded the statement of the Officer of the case namely ASI Angrej Singh no. 75 Amritsar (Rural) posted at Police Station Chattiwind, Amritsar. The report of this court is hereby submitted as under:

4. The statements of the parties and the investigating officer are attached herewith. The report is hereby submitted please for your kind perusal. I am highly obliged."

4. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 admits the fact of parties having compromised and states that he has no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioner is quashed.

5. Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise (Annexure P-2).

6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records of the case.

7. This Court and Apex Court has repeatedly dealt with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to quash proceeding recognizing compromise between parties in non-compoundable offences in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303, State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (2019) 5 SCC 688, Kulwinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya