SANDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed with a prayer to quash FIR No. 300 dated 3.12.1996 under Sections 447/380 read with section 149 IPC registered at Police Station Division No. 6 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

(2.) THE FIR sought to be quashed was registered on the complaint of Ram Chand son of Lachhman Singh resident of House No. 1072, Street No. 7, Janakpuri, Ludhiana. On 2.12.1996, it was stated by him that for the last two days he was down with fever. Therefore at about 8 p.m. he went to his house. At about 9 p.m. his brother Kesar Singh and brother-in-law Dharampal Singh came to his house to enquire about his health and they stayed with him. On 3.12.1996 at about 5 a.m. his brother and brother-in-law were going back to their house. When they reached near his shop on Gill Road, they saw a tempo standing in front of his shop. The locks of shutter were lying broken. At that time Harjit Singh resident of Model Town, Happy who runs a dhaba near bus stand along with Roki, Raju and Sandeep Singh were taking out the articles from his shop and were loading the same in the tempo. On enquiry by his brother and brother-in-law, Harjit Singh told that they had purchased that shop from Sikandar Singh on arriving at a compromise with Ram Chand. Case of Ram Chand is that he never entered into any compromise regarding the shop . His brother and brother-in-law came to his house and informed him about the incident. Ram Chand along with his brother Kesar Singh and brother-in-law Dharampal Singh rushed to his shop. Harjit Singh and his companion had gone away with the tempo. They found that broken locks were lying there and all the articles of the shop were missing. According to Ram Chand all this had taken place as a result of conspiracy hatched by Sikandar Singh, Harjit Singh and others.

(3.) IN pursuance of notice of motion issued vide order dated 1.5.1998, Ram Chand complainant put in appearance and filed reply in the form of his affidavit dated 29.6.1998. On 6.7.1998, Ram Chand, put in personal appearance and expressed his desire to make the statement. Accordingly, his statement was recorded wherein he stated that there was a dispute between him and his brother-in-law on the one hand and Harjit Singh alias Happi, Roki, Sandeep, Harish Kumar, Rakesh, Gurcharan Singh, Raju and Sikandar Singh on the other in respect of his shop at Gill Road, Ludhiana. It was further stated that after the registration of the case, respectables intervened and the dispute was resolved and compromise was effected and that now he has no grudge or grievance against any of the petitioners; that he does not want to pursue the case registered at his instance against the petitioners as he wants to live peacefully. It was further stated that he does not want to involve himself in litigation. He has no objection if FIR No. 300 dated 3.12.1996 under sections 457/380 read with section 149 IPC registered at Police Station Division No. 6, Ludhiana, is quashed. By so stating, Ram Chand respondent No. 2 has reiterated all the averments contained in his reply by way of affidavit.