Meet Sain & Others v. State Of Haryana & ORS

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 06.02.2017 Meet Sain and others ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Mahima Yashpal, AAG, Haryana.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.613 dated 01.10.2015, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341, 506 IPC (offences punishable under Sections 325, 354-B, 307 and 120-B IPC were added later on), registered at Police Station Sonipat City, District Sonipat, on the basis of compromise dated 06.05.2016 (Annexure P-2).

Brief facts of the case are that marriage of complainant was solemnized with Meet Sain (petitioner No.1). After few days, misunderstanding arose between them. On 01.10.2015, after appearing in the case, when the complainant coming out of the Court, her husband Meet Sain and other accused suddenly started to beat the complainant and her family members with the intention to kill her by pushing neck. On raising

-2noise, all they accused fled away from the place of occurrence. Thereafter, the F.I.R was registered against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that keeping in view the peace and harmony, the matter has now been amicably settled between the parties with the intervention of respectable persons, vide compromise dated 06.05.2016 (Annexure P-2).

During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court, was directed to record the statements of all the concerned parties, with regard to the genuineness and validity or otherwise of the compromise dated 06.05.2016 (Annexure P-2), by way of order dated 22.10.2016, by this Court.

In compliance of order dated 22.10.2016 of this Court, the report of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat, dated 15.11.2016 has been received. As per the report, the statements of all the concerned parties have been recorded and the complainant has no objection, if the present FIR registered against the petitioners is quashed. Statements of the petitioners and complainant have been recorded to the same effect. Consequently, in view of the above-said report and in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910; Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

-3Accordingly, FIR No.613 dated 01.10.2015, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341, 506 IPC (offences punishable under Sections 325, 354B, 307 and 120-B IPC were added later on), registered at Police Station Sonipat City, District Sonipat and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise dated 06.05.2016 (Annexure P-2).

The present petition stands disposed of.

February, 06, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No