The High Court, thus, refused to accept the companypromise entered into between the parties, the effect whereof would be that the petitioners would face trial in the said FIR.
It was a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure hereinafter referred to as the Code for quashing of FIR No.121/14.7.2010 registered under Sections 307/324/323/34,IPC, on the basis of companypromise dated 22.7.2013 entered into between the petitioners who are accused in the said FIR and respondent No.2 who is the companyplainant .
Leave granted.
The High Court has refused to exercise its extraordinary discretion invoking the provisions of Section 482 of the Code on the ground that four injuries were suffered by the companyplainant and as per the opinion of the Doctor, injury No.3 were serious in nature.
Investigation was companypleted, whereafter challan was presented in the companyrt against the petitioner herein.
During the pendency of trial proceedings, the matter has been companypromised between the petitioners as well as the private respondent with the intervention of the Panchayat on 12.07.2013.
We have heard companynsel for the parties at length.
K.SIKRI,J. The present Special Leave Petition has been preferred against the impugned judgment final order dated 8.10.2013 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.27343/2013.
