Anil Verma & ANR v. State Of Haryana & ANR

CRM-M-13965 of 2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13965 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 8.8.2017 ...

Anil Verma and another ................Petitioners vs.

State of Haryana and another .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: Mr. S.K. Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Gaurav Bansal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ...

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral) Petitioners - Anil Verma and Gyatri Devi have brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 720 dated 17.12.2012, for offence under Sections 420, 406, 506, 120B IPC, registered at Police Station Gurgaon City, District Gurgaon, against them, alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been effected between them and complainant Raj Pal - arrayed as respondent No.2. When the petition came up for hearing on 26.4.2016, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 - State of Haryana through State counsel, whereas respondent No.2 through Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, 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 Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the Illaqa

CRM-M-13965 of 2016 -2Magistrate was directed to send a report to this Court. Report has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon, in terms of which complainant Raj Pal and accused, namely, Anil Verma and Gyatri Devi had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, with free will, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Further complainant has stated that he has 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. It has been reported that no accused has been declared proclaimed offender in the FIR in question.

Alongwith the report statements of the complainant and both the accused, in original, have been annexed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State counsel, besides going through the record. Keeping in view the fact that the dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, which appears to have been arrived at between them voluntarily without any threat or coercion and in terms of ratio of the authority reported as Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, where in para 28, it has been held as under :- "The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

CRM-M-13965 of 2016 -3compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation."

The compromise is in interest of peace and tranquility in the society and for such like reasons this Court can quash the FIR and ancillary proceedings exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears to be a fit case to exercise such powers. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the abovesaid FIR alongwith ancillary proceedings are hereby quashed. ( H.S. Madaan ) Judge 8.8.2017 chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No