AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing FIR No. 324/2020 registered by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioners for
offences under section 452, 427, 504 and 506 IPC on the basis of complaint filed by the respondent No. 5 on behalf of respondent No. 4, who happens
to be wife of respondent No. 5. It is stated that the source of dispute between the petitioners and the private respondents is on account of common
land separating the house constructed by the father of the petitioners and that of the private respondents. On account of said dispute, FIR mentioned
above, was registered on 12.11.2020.
It is precisely stated by the petitioners that the parties are the next door neighbors to each other and also they have been residing there for decades
altogether peacefully. It is stated that a civil suit was also going on between the families of petitioners and the private respondents. It is further stated
that now the parties have amicably settled the dispute among themselves and with regard to that a written compromise has also been executed on
30.12.2020 between the petitioners and the respondent No. 4 and pursuant to this compromise, the civil suit also stands withdrawn. The petitioners as
such have sought quashment of the FIR in question on the ground that they have settled the dispute with respondent Nos. 4 and 5 amicably and there
is no dispute between them pending now. Even the learned Sessions Judge while granting bail in anticipation of arrest has observed that the parties
have settled their dispute.
Notice.
Mr. AseemSawhney, AAG accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. Achal Sharma, Advocate has also filed power of attorney on
behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 5.
The petitioners along with their counsel Mr. Rajesh Bhushan and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 along with their counsel Mr. Achal Sharma have appeared
before this Court and they have been identified by their respective counsels in the open Court. The respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have stated in the open
Court that they have settled the dispute with the petitioners and now at present there is no dispute pending between them and in order to live life
peacefully as neighbors, they do not want to prosecute the FIR in question and they further stated that they have no objection, if the FIR in question is
quashed.
Mr. Sawheny is also not averse to the settlement arrived between the parties.
A perusal of the record reveals that out of four offences mentioned in the FIR, only offence under section 427 IPC is compoundable and other three
offences are non-compoundable.
The allegations levelled against the petitioners pertain to house trespass, mischief and criminal intimidation only. No one has been injured in the
occurrence.Since, the dispute is between the neighbors and this is also not in dispute that the petitioners are also peaceful residents of the Union
Territory of J&K having no past criminal antecedents.In order to maintain harmony between the neighbors i.e. petitioners and respondent Nos. 4 and
5 so as to enable them to live peaceful life, this Court deems it proper to quash the FIR mentioned above notwithstanding the fact that offences under
sections 452, 504 and 506 IPCare not compoundable as this Court is of the considered opinion that the continuance of FIR despite the settlement
between the parties shall amount to abuse of process of law. The offences for which the FIR has been lodged are private in nature and do not have
serious impact on the society and also are not heinous in nature.Reliance is placed upon the judgment of Apex Court in case titled “State of
Madhya Pardesh versus Laxmi Narayan & Others†reported in AIR 2019 SC1296.
In view of the above, the FIR in question is quashed and the present petition is disposed of.