Munish Parmar And Another v. U.T. Of Chandigarh And Another

CRM-M No.27563 of 2021 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.27563 of 2021 Date of Decision:27.09.2021 (Heard through VC) Munish Parmar and another

...Petitioners

Vs U.T. of Chandigarh and another

...Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. B.S. Kanwar, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, APP, U.T., Chandigarh. Mr. Sanjeev Dua, Advocate for respondent No.2.

***** JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.28 dated 12.02.2020 registered under Sections 498-A, 406 Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 22.04.2021 (Annexure P-2) and affidavit of the complainant (Annexure P-3) 2.

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant on the allegations of harassment and ill-treatment at the hands of accusedpetitioners on account of demand of dowry. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. 3.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance POONAM BHATT 2021.09.28 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.27563 of 2021 -2of the direction, a report has been received from Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chandigarh stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. 4.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

6.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak. 7.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and of FIR No.28 dated 12.02.2020 registered under Sections 498-A, 406 Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.

(JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE September 27, 2021 P.Bhatt Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No POONAM BHATT 2021.09.28 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document