Shatrughan Tiwari v. State Of Haryana And ANR

CRM-M-5409-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-5409-2024 (O&M)

Reserved on: 05.12.2024

Pronounced on: 13.12.2024 Shatrughan Tiwari ... PeƟƟoner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Maninder Singh Saini, Advocate for the peƟƟoner.

Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, D.A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.2.

*** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police StaƟon SecƟons 17.04.2016 City Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC The peƟƟoner, arraigned as accused in the above capƟoned FIR, has come up before this Court under SecƟon 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequenƟal proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved person(s). 2.

During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, the accused and the aggrieved person(s) have compromised the maƩer, and its copy is annexed with this peƟƟon as Annexure P-2.

3.

AŌer that, the peƟƟoner came up before this Court to quash the FIR, impleading the aggrieved persons as respondent no. 2.

4.

Pursuant to order of this Court dated 02.02.2024, the aggrieved person(s) (Respondent no.2), appeared before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bahadurgarh and stated that there would be no objecƟon if the Court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 19.02.2024, the parƟes consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat or coercion.

Jyoti Sharma 2024.12.13 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

CRM-M-5409-2024 ANALYSIS & REASONING:

5.

An analysis of the FIR reveals that all the accused are not impleaded as peƟƟoners in the present peƟƟon. Moreover, there are specific allegaƟons against the peƟƟoner-accused that they had also cheated Bhupinder @ Monu, Pinku and Sonu. However, the peƟƟoner has neither arraigned them as respondent(s) in this case nor their statements have been recorded before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. 6.

Since all the vicƟms did not state their no objecƟon to the compromise and also the reasons which led to the compromise, as such this Court cannot proceed further in this maƩer.

7.

Given above, the peƟƟon is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the peƟƟoners to file a fresh peƟƟon and there would be no necessity to re-examine the complainant-vicƟm and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The copies of the statements along with report would suffice. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 13.12.2024 JyoƟ Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No Jyoti Sharma 2024.12.13 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh