Mayank Aggarwal v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRM-M-44026-2022(O&M) 2023:PHHC: 110417

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44026-2022(O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 23.08.2023 Mayank Aggarwal

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present :

Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Garg, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seek quashing of FIR No.100 dated 24.05.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 304-A of IPC, at Police Station, Udyog Vihar, District Gurugram alongwith other subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromise dated 12.07.2022 (Annexure P-4), stated to have been arrived between the parties.

2.

Since quashing was sought on the basis of compromise, this Court on 28.09.2022 had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements in support of the compromise. A veracity report was also called for. 3.

Report dated 02.02.2023 of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram had been received. Report reveals that statements of complainant party i.e. respondent No.2 as also of accused/present petitioner herein, were duly recorded. It is opined that a compromise has been arrived at without any pressure, undue influence or coercion. The report is accompanied by the statements of parties. It is apparent that the complainant/respondent No.2 HARISH KUMAR 2023.08.24 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRM-M-44026-2022(O&M) 2023:PHHC: 110417 and accused/petitioner have arrived at a compromise voluntarily and without any coercion.

3.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon judgement dated 24.02.2023 passed in CRM-M-5529-2019 to contend that Section 304-A of IPC can also be quashed. Further trial would be an exercise in futility and ultimately result in acquittal of the petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel for complainant/respondent No.2 states that he would have no objection to the quashing of FIR in question. 5.

This Court in appropriate cases can exercise the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of criminal proceedings/FIR on the basis of compromise. A reference in this regard may be made to a decision dated 29.09.2021 of the Supreme Court in case titled Ramgopal and anr. V. The State of Madhya Pradesh1and a Full Bench decision of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others V. State of Punjab and others2. 6.

In the premise it is an appropriate case for exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and to bring to an end the criminal proceedings initiated in the light of impugned FIR.

7.

Petition is thus allowed. FIR No.100 dated 24.05.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 304-A of IPC, at Police Station, Udyog Vihar, District Gurugram and all proceedings emanating there from qua the petitioners stand quashed.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 23.08. 2023 (ARUN MONGA) Harish Kumar JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No 1Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 22007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 HARISH KUMAR 2023.08.24 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment