Sheela Bharti v. State Of Punjab And Another

E HIGH COURT OF PUNJ JAB AND HARYANA ARH e of Decision: May 29, 2024 IN THE AT CHANDIGA Date ........Petitioner SHEELA BHA STATE OF PU CORAM: HO

Present:

M M M ARTI

Versus

UNJAB AND ANOTHER ........Respondents ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARK KESH MANUJA Mr. Satvir Singh, Advocate for Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, AAG, P Mr. Rahul Aggarwal, Advocate the petitioner.

Punjab.

for respondent No.2.

**** ANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MA By y way of this petition filed un nder Section 482 Cr.P.C. the e petitioner pray ys for quashing of case bearing g FIR No.73 dated 09.11.2016 registered und der Sections 406 and 420 of IPC at P.S. Cantt Jalandhar, , District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar along with all consequential l proceedings a arising out of the same on th he basis of compromise dated d 19.01.2017.

2.

As s per allegations levelled in the e FIR, the petitioner defrauded d complainant-re espondent No.2 of a sum of R Rs.1,63,000/- on the pretext of f sending him a abroad. Though, there was on ne more accused in the FIR, , however, the m matter has been compromised with present petitioner only.

3.

Th his Court while issuing notice e of motion vide order dated d 24.04.2024 dir rected the parties to appear be efore trial Court for getting their r statements rec corded as regards the veracity y of the compromise arrived at t between them .

4.

In pursuance to the order date ed 24.04.2024, a report dated d 09.05.2024 ha as been received from the con ncerned Court, stating that the e compromise in n the present case is genuine a and voluntary.

-25.

Thus once, the compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 has no objection as regard quashing of FIR as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioner; the dispute purely personal in nature, there does not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR, in part, qua the petitioner. Even, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR in question, qua the petitioner, on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. 6.

The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in future, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, no cause remains for the trial Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating this FIR. The compromise in question is even found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".

7.

Further, learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Jayrajsingh Digvijaysinh Rana Vs. State of Gujarat and Another', 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in 'Joginder Singh & Another Vs. State of Punjab and Another', passed in CRM-M-237392010 decided on 27.04.2011, 'Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab &

-3Another', passed in CRM-M- 37395-2016 decided on 16.05.2017 and 'Vimal Kalra & others Vs. State of Punjab & another', passed in CRM-M-20355-2022, decided on 25.07.2022 submits that partial quashing of the FIR is possible on the basis of a compromise. 8.

Thus, in view of the aforesaid report, accompanied by statements of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments, the FIR No. 73 dated 09.11.2016 registered under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC at P.S. Cantt Jalandhar, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioner, however, subject to deposit of Rs.10,000/- with Nishkam Sewa Group, run by Punjab and Haryana High court Lawyers at Chandigarh.

29.05.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No