Rajan Gulati @ Raju And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another
CRM-M-27661-2024 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27661-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 08.07.2024 ....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present :
Mr. Gagandeep Sanwal, Advocate for Mr. Kunal Muthreja, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Akshay Kumar Dhaiya, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR (Annexure P1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/settlement dated 18.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows: FIR No.
Dated Sections Police Station 16.12.2023 323, 324, 452 and 506 IPC (325, 326, 344 IPC added later on) Sector-8, Faridabad 2.
With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 18.05.2024 (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to SANDAL SHARMA 2024.07.11 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-27661-2024 (O&M) -2- report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad vide report dated 07.06.2024 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. The petitioners have also deposited the cost of Rs.10,000/- in compliance to the order dated 29.05.2024.
3.
Respondent No. 2 is represented by his counsel and does not oppose the compromise.
4.
In view of the aforesaid report of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and "Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another", (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. 5.
In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.975 dated 16.12.2023, under Sections 323, 324, 452 and 506 (325, 326, 344 added later on) of IPC registered at Police Station Sector-8, Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioners. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 08.07.2024 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes/No ii) Whether reportable?
Yes/No SANDAL SHARMA 2024.07.11 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment