AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anoop Chitkara, J
FIR No.
Dated
Police Station
Sections
363
20.06.2021
SAS Nagar, Mohali
420, 120-B IPC
The peoners, arraigned as accused in the above ca poned FIR, have come up before this Court under Secon 482 CrPC for quashin g of the FIR and all consequenal proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved person.
During the pendency of the peon, the accused an d the aggrieved person have compromised the maer, and its copy is annexed with this Pettion as Annexure P-2.
Aer that, the peoner came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing peon, impleading the aggrieved person as respondent.
This court had asked the pares to appear before the concerned court and had asked the said court to give its report as per the format. The report reads as follows:
Name of the reporting
Court
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Derabassi
FIR No.
Dated
Police Station
Sections
363
20.06.2021
SAS Nagar, Mohali
420, 120-B IPC
Criminal Case no.
before trial Court
-----
1.
Names of the complainant/ victims(s)/
aggrieved persons(s)
Shamit Bansal
2.
Dates on which the statement(s) of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) were recorded
27.01.2023
3.
Has the identity of the complainant/
victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) been verified?
Yes
4.
Whether all the victims/ all the
aggrieved persons have compromised the matter?
Yes
5.
Is there pressure, threat, or coercion upon the victim(s)/aggrieved
person(s)/complainant?
No
6.
Names of the accused person(s)
Nitin Bansal son of Makhan Lal Bansal
Ravinder Pal Singh son of Ramdhari
Gautam Singla son of Ravinder Pal Singla
7.
Dates on which the statement(s) of the
accused persons(s) recorded
30.01.2023
8.
Whether all the accused have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have
compromised.
Yes
9.
Whether proclamation proceedings
are pending against any accused?
No
10.
Has the police report been filed or
not?
No
11.
Notice of accusation /Charges have
been framed or not?
No
12.
Sections of statutes invoked in the
matter
420, 120-B IPC
13.
Whether the court is satisfied with the
genuineness of the compromise?
Yes
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
However, the peoners did not arraign vicm-Bind u Goel Bansal as respondent in this case.
Since all the vicms did not state about their no objecon to the compromise and also the reasons which led to the compromise, as such this court cannot proceed further in this maer.
Given above, the Pettion is dismissed. However, li berty is reserved to the peoners to file a fresh Pettion and there would be no necessity re-examine the complainant/aggrieved person and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The copies of the statements along with report would suffice.
Pettion dismissed in the terms menoned above, with liberty reserved.