Arvind Verma & Others v. State Of Haryana & Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-49137-2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.01.2018 Arvind Verma and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

***** CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Hitender Kansal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 253 dated 16.10.2016, under Section 323, 406 & 498-A of the IPC, registered at Police Station Naraingarh (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise entered into between the parties. In brief, the facts of the case are that complainant-respondent No.2 had made a complaint to the police against the petitioners i.e. her husband and his family members, on account of demand of dowry. Now the parties have compromised the matter with the intervention of respectables and in terms of the compromise the parties have decided to part their ways. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have compromised the matter, they were directed to appear before the trial Court for getting their

CRM-M-49137-2017 -2statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report in has been received from the the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Naraingarh stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same appears to be genuine one.

Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, learned AAG, Haryana on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, they would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

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

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.

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 Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another, 2012

(4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 253 dated 16.10.2016, under Section 323, 406 & 498-A of the IPC, registered at Police Station Naraingarh (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising

CRM-M-49137-2017 -3out of the same are quashed qua the petitioners. The petition stands disposed of.

23.01.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.