Naveen v. State Of Haryana And ANR

CRM-M-13878 of 2015 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-13878 of 2015 Date of Decision: August 21, 2015 Naveen ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Vishal Kashyap, AAG, Haryana.

Rajan Gupta, J (Oral) Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of F.I.R No. 101 dated 5.4.2013 registered under Sections 498-A/506/323 IPC at Police Station, Bhawanikhera, District Bhiwani and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that during the pendency of this petition a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and dispute has been amicably settled. Relying upon the judgment reported as Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, learned counsel submit that in view of compromise, the impugned F.I.R deserves to be quashed.

Learned State counsel does not dispute the ratio of judgment in Kulwinder Singh's case supra and submit that in case a compromise is arrived at between the parties the State shall not stand in the way of quashing of F.I.R.

CRM-M-13878 of 2015 2 Heard It appears that on 30.4.2015, a direction was issued by this court to record the statements of the parties with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise. A report has been received from the trial court. Operative part thereof reads thus:- "Consequently, both the parties i.e accused as well as the complainant have appeared and accordingly, their separate statements along with a joint statement on oath have been recorded, wherein, complainant and accused namely, Sunita and Naveen have submitted that a compromise has been effected with the accused.

Complainant Sunita has stated that she has received all alimony regarding her maintenance and they both have filed a mutual divorce petition and now she does not want any action against the accused and she has no objection in cancellation of FIR Similarly the statement of mother of complainant Ishwanti has also been recorded. Statement of accused Naveen has also been recorded wherein he has stated that a compromise has been effected and he has paid all alimony regarding maintenance allowance of complainant Sunita and the compromise has been effected out of their free will, consent and without any coercion or undue influence.

The aforesaid compromise effected between the parties is for the welfare of both the parties and they have compromised the matter with their own sweet will and without any pressure or influence and thus they have no objection if the FIR is quashed.

CRM-M-13878 of 2015 3 parties."

The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served by continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in light of Full Bench judgment of this court in Kulwinder Singh's case supra.

Resultantly, the present petition is allowed. The F.I.R in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. (Rajan Gupta) Judge August 21, 2015 BB