IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 203 CRR-263-2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.07.2025 DULI CHAND ETC. .... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ....RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Jai VirYadav, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Gautam, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, Advocate and Ms. Garima Dikshit, Advocate (amicus curiae) for the petitioner(s). Mr. Viney Phogat, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Rahul Bansal, Advocate (amicus curiae) for the respondent No.2. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed challenging the impugned judgment dated 05.11.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad whereby the judgment of acquittal dated 22.04.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate in criminal case No.395 dated 28.05.1999 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Central Faridabad was set aside and the matter was remanded back for passing a judgment afresh. On 16.07.2025, the following order was passed:- “The complainant Shanti Devi initiated prosecution vide FIR No. 395 of 1999 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S. Central Faridabad against her brothers, namely, Duli Chand, Desh Raj, Jai Raj and Siri Chand. Siri Chand died during the course of the trial. Duli Chand, Desh Raj and Jai Raj came to be acquitted by the Trial Court. The KUSUM 2025.07.19 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh CRR-263-2010 (O&M) 2 complainant Shanti Devi preferred a revision before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad and vide order dated 28.07.2008, the said Court remanded the case back for passing a fresh judgment. The said order has been impugned in the present petition by the accused. The counsel for the parties contend that during the pendency of the present petition, Duli Chand and Jai Raj have also passed away and only Desh Raj is surviving. A compromise is said to have been arrived at between the parties and the LRs of Shanti Devi complainant, namely, Rakam Singh, Ram Chander @ Chander Singh and Jaipal Singh sons of Lt. Smt. Shanti Devi do not wish to pursue this litigation. Let the said LRs of Shanti Devi file their affidavits with regard to the compromise. Adjourned to 18.07.2025.” Affidavits of the LRs of respondent No.2, namely, Jaipal Singh and Ram Chander @ Chander Singh sons of Smt. Shanti Devi to be placed on record and marked as ‘A’ and ‘B’ respectively. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner – accused and the LRs of respondent No.2 state that a compromise has been arrived at. However, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that one of the LRs of respondent No.2, namely, Rakam Singh has orally agreed to the compromise but has not filed an affidavit in that regard. Be that as it may, in view of the fact that the dispute is between close family members and a compromise was arrived at firstly during the course of the trial and thereafter at this stage and the land in question reverted back to the complainant – Shanti Devi, the present revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.11.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby the said Court has remanded back the case for passing a fresh judgment is set aside and the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 18.07.2025 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No KUSUM 2025.07.19 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh