High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/1846/2015disposed of

Ramesh v. State Of Haryana

2015-07-21Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan3 pages

Date of decision: 21st July, 2015 Ramesh Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana Respondent

! ! 1.

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:

Mr. Anshumaan Dalal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Munish Sharma, Asstt. Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent.

Mr. Rohan Jain, Advocate for the complainant.

!" Petitioner Ramesh was found guilty and convicted under Sections 148/448 read with Sections 149 and 506 IPC by the trial Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rohtak through judgment dated 04.07.2014 and vide order of sentence dated 07.07.2014 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of 1,000 and in default to undergo further imprisonment for one month under Section 148 IPC, whereas under

Section 448 read with Section 149 IPC he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of 1,000 and in default to undergo further imprisonment for one month, and under Section 506 the petitioner was awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three months, and which findings were affirmed by the lower appellate Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak vide judgment dated 27.04.2015.

By way of instant revision petition, a request was made seeking quashment of the FIR and all consequent proceedings including judgment of conviction on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties, whereupon report of the Court below was called for.

Report dated 11.06.2015 of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak has been received whereby after recording statements of complainant Laxmi Narain and the accused namely Ramesh, the Court has shown its satisfaction that the compromise has been arrived at voluntarily, out of free will of the parties, without any undue influence, coercion or pressure.

In the light of the satisfaction shown by the Court, the fact that the offences for which the accused has been hauled up are not of serious nature, together with the fact that compromise will go a long way in ironing out differences for betterment of future life of the parties and in view of the law laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in #!$%&!'()*+(,+(-*&./!-+-&+.0+(++(,+(-*&.123

2.'4'(+53and by the Hon'ble Apex Court in 23! 11 titled as #'+( !'()* / !-+-& $(6+% +(, +(-*&. and 23! titled as #+.'(,&.!'()*+(,-*&.7/!-+-&

$(6+% +(, +(-*&., FIR No.271 dated 14.09.2008 registered at Police Station Kalanaur, District Rohtak under Sections 148/149/457/448/511/506 IPC and judgment of conviction dated 04.07.2014 of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rohtak and the judgment passed by the appellate Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak dated 27.04.2015 qua the present petitioner along with all consequences arising thereof are hereby quashed. The revision petition stands disposed off in those terms. !3 $50"