Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43876 (PNJ)

AMRITPAL SINGH AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRM-M/19528/2025 · 2025-05-28

Manisha Batra

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 252 CRM-M-19528-2025 Date of Decision: 28.05.2025 Amritpal Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA **** Present: Mr. K.B.S. Mann, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Sharma, A.A.G, Punjab. Mr. Gursharan Singh, Advocate for Ms. Kuljinder Bir Kaur, Advocate, for respondent No.3. **** MANISHA BATRA , J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under for quashing of FIR No.137 dated 01.07.2020 registered under Sections 336, 341, 506, 34 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3-A of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (Section 431 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. This Court vide order dated 08.04.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the NISHA 2025.05.29 19.57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-19528-2025 -2- learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Muktsar Sahib and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 23.04.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2& 3 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 6. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.137 dated 01.07.2020 registered under Sections 336, 341, 506, 34 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3-A of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (Section 431 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioners. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE May 28, 2025 Nisha-1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No NISHA 2025.05.29 19.57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document