High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/22977/2016allowed

Deepak Yadav v. State Of Haryana And ANR

2016-09-15Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

Crl. Misc. No. M-22977 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-22977 of 2016 Date of decision : 15.09.2016 Deepak Yadav ......Petitioner versus State of Haryana & anr.

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) Quashing of FIR No. 520 dated 25.06.2015 under Sections 323/406/498-A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon, is being sought on the basis of compromise deed/memorandum of undertaking dated 21.04.2016 (Annexure P-4). Respondent No. 2 got married to petitioner on 05.02.2013 at Gurgaon. Due to temperamental differences, both the parties could not live together as husband and wife. No child was born out of this wedlock. The relationship between them became strain and thereafter, the F.I.R was registered against the petitioner on account of bringing less dowry and harassment caused by the petitioner.

However, the matter has now been duly compromised, vide compromise deed/memorandum of undertaking dated 21.04.2016 (Annexure P-4). Even a divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu GAURAV ARORA 2016.09.19 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Crl. Misc. No. M-22977 of 2016 Marriage Act has been filed in which a joint statement has also been recorded on 21.04.2016. Petitioner has agreed to pay Rs.25 lacs to the complainant as full and final settlement.

In compliance of order dated 12.07.2016, report of Judicial Magistrate 1t Class, Gurgaon has been received in this regard. As per report, statement of complainant/respondent No. 2 and statement of petitioner have been recorded. Complainant stated that the matter stands compromised between the parties and she does not want to proceed further against the accused and has no objection, if the present F.I.R be quashed against the petitioner. She stated that she had received Rs.12.5 lacs from the petitioner and remaining amount will be paid on 15.11.2016. The compromise has been entered voluntarily. To the same effect is the statement given by the petitioner.

Consequently, in view of the status report and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and another 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation. Accordingly, FIR No. 520 dated 25.06.2015 under Sections 323/406/498-A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon, is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner.

The petition stands disposed of.

15.09.2016 (RITU BAHRI) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2016.09.19 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document