IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Date of decision:13.05.2019
SANJAY GOKAL … Petitioner
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. …. Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
Present: Mr. Lakhvir Kumar, Advocate, for
Mr. Paramjit Singh Bal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.
Ms. Pooja Arora, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.
HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for
quashing of Criminal Complaint No.COMI 37212/2013 dated 26.04.2013
registered under Sections 406, Section420, Section425, Section415, Section423, Section354, Section186 and Section120-B of
IPC pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Ludhiana and summoning order dated 30.11.2016 (Annexure P-2) whereby
petitioner has been summoned under Section 354 IPC, on the basis of
compromise dated 04.01.2019 (Annexure P-3).
This Court vide order dated 04.02.2019 had directed the parties
to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their statements
recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the
genuineness of the compromise.
1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 09-06-2019 21:13:48 :::
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana and got their
statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned
Magistrate has submitted report dated 02.03.2019 to the effect that the
compromise is genuine and has been effected between the parties voluntarily
and without any pressure or undue influence.
Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Ramneet Kaur has
already made her statement with regard to compromise before learned
Magistrate on 28.02.2019. The same is reproduced as under:-
“Stated that I am complainant in this criminal complaint
case and only two accused namely Sanjay Gokal and Charanvir
Sohal were summoned for offence punishable under Section
354 IPC, in this case. Now matter has been compromised
between me and accused Sanjay Gokal only. Compromise is
already submitted with the Hon’ble High Court. I have
compromised the matter voluntarily, with my free will, without
any pressure from any side. Charanvir Sohal is appearing in
this court and no accused is proclaimed offender in this case. I
have no objection if proceedings of present complaint are
quashed against accused Sanjay Gokal, only. Copy of my
Adhar Card is Ex.C1. “
Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent
No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties.
In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to
continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant case.
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
2 of 3
09-06-2019 21:13:48 :::
Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10
SCC 303, this petition is allowed and Criminal Complaint No.COMI
37212/2013 dated 26.04.2013 registered under Sections 406, Section420, Section425, Section415,
Section423, Section354, Section186 and Section120-B of IPC pending before the Court of Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana and summoning order dated 30.11.2016
(Annexure P-2) whereby petitioner has been summoned under Section 354
IPC, are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of compromise dated
04.01.2019 (Annexure P-3).
(HARI PAL VERMA)
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
09-06-2019 21:13:48 :::