Jasleen Kaur And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19678-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: July 22nd, 2024 Jasleen Kaur and others .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate for respondent No.2.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) CRM-17199-2024 Prayer in this application under Rule 3-A (i) of Chapter 6, Part-B, Volume V of the High Court Rules and Orders is for grant of leave to file the accompanied petition.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit of the counsel, the same is allowed. CRM-M-19678-2024 Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.558 dated 28.11.2021 under Sections 384, 389 of the IPC (Sections 120-B, 201, 212 of the IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Kaithal, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

2.

Vide order dated 22.04.2024 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.07.24 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-19678-2024 (O&M) -221.05.2024 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

3.

Report has since been received from the learned trial Court in pursuance of the directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accusedpetitioners is quashed. 4.

The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, along with its report.

5.

Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.

6.

In view of the report of the learned trial Court and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

7.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. July 22nd, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.07.24 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh