MANOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No.2 has appeared in person and has filed his affidavit which is taken on record. He has also attached a photocopy of his driving licence for the purpose of his identification. SI Sarabjit Singh who is present in Court has also identified respondent No.2-Ravinder Singh.

(2.) IN terms of the affidavit that has been filed by respondent No.2, it is stated by him that he has compromised the matter with Manohar Singh (petitioner No.1) and others on 7/2/2010 and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Ravinder Singh (respondent No.2) has stated that he has entered into a compromise of his own free will and desire and without any kind of pressure or undue influence. It is stated that he has compromised the matter with all the accused and none remains. Heard counsel for the petitioners, State counsel and Ravinder Singh (respondent No.2) in person.

(3.) RAVINDER Singh (respondent No.2) got the aforesaid FIR (Annexure P1) registered. It is alleged by the complainant that his father Darshan Singh @ Bhula died on 21.6.1984. He was survived by Kulwant Kaur, mother of the complainant/respondent No.2, four sons namely Manohar Singh (petitioner No.1), Sarabjit Singh, Jaswant Singh and RAVINDER Singh (respondent No.2) and three daughters namely Paramjit Kaur, Baljit Kaur and Sarabjit Kaur. After the death of Darshan Singh @ Bhula, father of the complainant, they inherited his moveable and immoveable assets in equal share. However, with a view to grab the properties of the father of respondent No.2, his elder brother Manohar Singh (petitioner No.1), it is alleged, prepared a fake Will dated 7.12.1983 after 23-24 years of death of the father of the complainant in his favour. Manohar Singh (petitioner No.1) had prepared the Will in connivance with Ajit Singh (petitioner No.2) and Avtar Singh (petitioner No.3) and Piara Singh (petitioner No.4). The fake Will had been scribed by Piara Singh (petitioner No.4) and it was witnessed by Ajit Singh (petitioner No.2) and Avtar Singh (petitioner No.3). On the basis of the said allegations, the FIR has been registered. It is stated that in terms of the compromise deed dated 7.2.2010 (Annexure P2), the matter has been amicably resolved. RAVINDER Singh (respondent No.2) has submitted that he has got his due share and therefore he does not want to pursue the case. The dispute is between the brothers which has been amicably resolved between them. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances it would be just and expedient that the FIR is quashed. This is more so for the reasons that the challan in the case has not been filed and no proceedings at present are pending in the Court. In Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008) 4 SCC 582 it was observed by the Supreme Court as follows:-