Saroj Bala v. State Of Haryana And Others

272 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.08.2018 Saroj Bala

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Harsish Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Sunny Dhull, Advocate, for Mr. Abhinav Kaler, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 & 3.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.81 dated 05.03.2016, registered against respondents No.2 & 3 under Sections 406, 498-A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Gohana Sadar, District Sonepat (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise entered into between the parties. The marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with respondent No.2 per Hindu rites and ceremonies on 12.07.2013. However, due to temperamental differences between the husband and wife, matrimonial

-2dispute arose and the aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of the petitioner. However, now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. A settlement /agreement has been entered into between the parties, a copy thereof is annexed with the petition.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gohana, stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same appears to be genuine one.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar, learned AAG, Haryana, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, and learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3 admit to the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, they 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 rival parties and gone through the record.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a 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

-3both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.81 dated 05.03.2016, registered under Sections 406, 498-A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Gohana Sadar, District Sonepat (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua respondent No.2 & 3.

The petition stands disposed of.

06.08.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.