High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/38240/2016allowed

Ram Kumar v. State Of Haryana And ANR

2017-03-30Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

Crl. Misc. No. M-38240 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-38240 of 2016 Date of decision : 30.03.2017 Ram Kumar ......Petitioner versus State of Haryana and anr.

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. S.S. Narula, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. D.R. Singla, DAG, Haryana Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) Quashing of FIR No. 306 dated 12.09.2013 under Sections 406/498-A/323/506/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Kurukshetra and judgment dated 18.05.2015, is being sought on the basis of compromise deed dated 29.04.2016 (P-4) Respondent No. 2 got married to petitioner on 22.03.2010. Due to temperamental differences, both the parties could not live together as husband and wife. The relationship between them became strained and F.I.R was registered against the petitioner on account of harassment and humiliation caused by the petitioner on the pretext of bringing less dowry. After this, the petitioner was convicted by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 18.05.

2015, petitioner preferred an appeal, which was pending the learned Lower Appellate Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the matter has now been duly compromised, vide compromise deed dated 29.04.2016 (P-4). In compliance of order dated 25.10.2016, report dated 03.02.2017 of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra has been GAURAV ARORA 2017.04.

Crl. Misc. No. M-38240 of 2016 received in this regard. As per report, statement of parties have been recorded. The 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 and the judgment of conviction be set aside. The compromise has been entered voluntarily. To the same effect is the statement given by petitioner.

Consequently, in view of the status report dated 03.02.2017 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.

Reference at this stage can be made to judgments of this Court in cases of Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana and another, 2016(2) RCR Crl 176 and Sube Singh and another v. State of Haryana and another, 2013(4) RCR Crl. 102 wherein it has been held that High Court has the vested unparallel power to quash criminal proceedings at any stage to secure ends of justice.

Accordingly, FIR No. 306 dated 12.09.2013 under Sections 406/498-A/323/506/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Kurukshetra and judgment dated 18.05.2015 are quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner. Petitioner is acquitted of the charges framed against him.

The petition stands disposed of.

30.03.2017 (RITU BAHRI) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2017.04.07 12:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh