Anand Singh & ANR v. State Of Haryana & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.M-15802 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 17, 2016 Anand Singh and another

...Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Ashish Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against respondents State of Haryana and Mahender for quashing of FIR No.124 dated 18.04.2013 under Sections 306 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Meham, District Rohtak in view of the compromise dated 22.04.2016 as well as for setting aside all the subsequent proceedings.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the record.

As per the FIR, the father of the complainant committed suicide by hanging. The allegation is that the deceased was being harassed by Sarpanch Anand and his brother Master Sunder since 2010 after becoming Sarpanch for not voting in their favour. They had VINEET GULATI 2016.05.31 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-15802 of 2016 -2given a complaint to Arya Nagar, Police Post Rohtak. As per the FIR, suicide note was also recovered. The deceased also moved application against Anand Singh and his brother Sunder to DSP and SHO, Meham that they had threatened with dire consequences and said that he had big links in politics and has links with criminals but no action was taken. The father of the complainant committed suicide seeing no option.

Keeping in view the serious nature and gravity of the offence, I do not find it a fit case where FIR should be quashed on the basis of compromise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, held that in respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.; or other offences of mental depravity under Indian Penal Code or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, settlement between offender and victim can have no legal sanction at all. In the present case, serious offence has been committed.

In view of the discussion, no ground is made out for quashing of the FIR. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

May 17, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI 2016.05.31 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh