Kuldeep Tewetia & ANR v. State Of Haryana & ANR

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-14888 of 2016 (O&M) .....

Date of decision:28.5.2016 Kuldeep Tewetia and another .....Petitioners v.

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents ....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Anil Kumar Rana, Advocate for Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. D.R. Singla, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate for Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate for the complainant-respondent No.2.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.66 dated 8.3.2013 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 451, 186, 506 and 509 IPC at Police Station Faridabad Old, District Faridabad and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantAnita Yadav on the allegations that the accused-petitioners misbehaved, caused hindrance in public works and threatened her. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably

Cr. Misc. No.M-14888 of 2016 (O&M) [2] compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad has sent his report dated 21.5.2016 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 and have gone through the record. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate

Cr. Misc. No.M-14888 of 2016 (O&M) [3] conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.66 dated 8.3.2013 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 451, 186, 506 and 509 IPC at Police Station Faridabad Old, District Faridabad and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

May 28 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*