Anod Dhawan And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CRM-M No.35960-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35960 of 2017 Date of decision: 04.12.2017 Anod Dhawan and another .. Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another .. Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Ms. Neha Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Amrik Narwal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. R.S. Dadwal, Advocate for Mr. Arun Luthra for respondent No.2.

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No.410 dated 01.09.2015 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120-B of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station Sector 55, Faridabad along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 18.09.2017 (Annexure P-2).

FIR in this case was registered on the complaint of respondents no. 2 to 4, wherein they levelled allegations against petitioners that they have duped them by taking fee but not got their names registered with the State Technical Institute resulting in spoiling of their academic year. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has since been settled vide compromise, copy of which has been placed on file as Annexure A-2.

Jitender Kumar 2017.12.06 08:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH Learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 submits that the

CRM-M No.35960-2017 -2matter has since been amicably settled as petitioners have compensated respondents no. 2 to 4 and now they have no grouse against petitioners and have no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) is quashed. Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of affidavit of Assistant Commissioner of Police, which is taken on record, and has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

In order to verify the veracity and genuineness of the settlement between the parties, they were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 21.11.2017 stating therein that the compromise has been effected between complainants and the accused which appears to be genuine and voluntary in nature and without any pressure.

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties to this petition an opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.

For the reasons as discussed above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 410 dated 01.09.2015 (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua petitioners, is quashed.

December 04, 2017 (SURINDER GUPTA) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Jitender Kumar 2017.12.06 08:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH