Rakesh Kumar And Another v. State Of Haryana And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35847-2024 Date of decision: September 30th, 2024 Rakesh Kumar and another .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Raghav Bali, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

Mr. Sikandh Mehta, Advocate for respondent No.2. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.405 dated 18.12.2019 under Sections 120-B, 420, 406, 506 of the IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Taraori, District Karnal, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including charge order dated 21.09.2021 (Annexure P-2) on the basis of compromise dated 28.06.2024 (Annexure P-3). 2.

Vide order dated 30.07.2024 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 30.08.2024 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

3.

Report has since been received from learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, in pursuance of the directions of this PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.30 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-35847-2024 -2Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.

4.

The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, along with its report.

5.

Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.

6.

In view of the report of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

7.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. September 30th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.30 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh