SIMRAN SAINI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners - Simran Saini @ Rubina Sharma @ Raveena Kumari and others have brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 39 dated 23.03.2019, for offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Jaitu, District Faridkot, against them, along with consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been effected between them and complainant Gurcharan Singh and Sukhvir Singh (son of the complainant)- arrayed as respondents No.2 and

(2.) When the petition came up for hearing on 14.10.2019, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. Respondent No. 1 - State of Punjab through State counsel, whereas respondents No.2 and 3 through Mr. Vikas Sonak, Advocate had put in appearance. Then in light of the contention that parties have since effected compromise, they were directed to put in appearance before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and was directed to send a report to this Court.

(3.) Report has been received from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jaitu, in terms of which complainant Gurcharan Singh and Sukhvir Singh (son of the complainant) and accused, namely, Simran Saini @ Rubina Sharma @ Raveena Kumari, Paramjeet Singh and Jasvir Kaur had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, without any threat, undue influence or coercion. Further, the complainant and his son have stated that they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed by this Court. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of the compromise so arrived at between the parties. Along with the report statements of the complainant, his son and all the accused, have been annexed.