Akash Verma And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-991-2019 Decided on : 22.01.2020 Akash Verma and others . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL PRESENT: Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Advocate for Mr. B. Diwakar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Ashish Sanghi, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ketan Antil, Advocate for respondent No.2 - complainant.

**** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (Oral) The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 180, dated 17.11.2017, under Sections 498-A, 406, 377, 354, 506, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Women, Rohtak and the consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise dated 20th November, 2018 (Annexure P-2) arrived at, between the parties. Vide order dated 20th May, 2019 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, Police Station Women, Rohtak, to get their statements recorded regarding the compliance arrived at, between them.

Report has since been received from the learned JMIC, Rohtak, in pursuance to the direction of this Court, 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 JAWALA RAM 2020.01.24 19:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-991-2019 - 2 - and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that she would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed. The trial Court has annexed the copies of statements of the parties in original along with its report.

It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the marriage between the parties has since been dissolved by decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 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.

In view of the report of the learned JMIC, Rohtak and the principles laid down by 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. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE January 22, 2020 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2020.01.24 19:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh