Anju v. State Of Haryana And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: January 31, 2024 ANJU ........Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present:
Mr. Mohit Kakkar, Advocate for Mr. Manvender S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 1.
By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner prays for quashing of case FIR No.384 dated 24.06.2017 registered under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 494 and 497 of IPC at P.S. City Sonepat, District Sonepat along with all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise. 2.
As per allegations levelled in the FIR, the accused-petitioner along with co-accused/Lokesh hatched a criminal conspiracy against the complainant and cheated him besides forging various documents of minor child Harsh, born out of the wedlock of petitioner and complainant. One of the accused namely Lokesh has died. If the allegations levelled in the FIR are taken at its face value, there has been no financial loss to anyone and the alleged documents were merely used by the petitioner for getting her son admitted in a school for his educational purposes. 3.
This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 07.12.2023 directed the parties to appear before the trial Court for the purpose of getting their statements recorded with regard to the veracity of the compromise arrived at between them. In pursuance to the order dated 07.12.2023, a report dated 22.12.2023 has been received
-2from the concerned Court, stating that the compromise in the present case is genuine and voluntary.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 has no objection as regards quashing of FIR as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioner; the dispute purely personal in nature, there does not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR. He also submits that even, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that allegations in the present FIR are of serious nature and he opposes the prayer made in the petition.
6.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records including the report dated 22.12.2023. The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in peace in future, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, no cause remains for the trial Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating this FIR. The compromise in question is even found to be fully in consonance with the directions issued by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".
-37.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid report, accompanied by statements of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments, the petition is allowed and FIR No.384 dated 24.06.2017 registered under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 494 and 497 of IPC at P.S. City Sonepat, District Sonepat along with all consequential proceeding arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. 8.
The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment of Costs of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the Poor Patients' Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a period of two weeks from today. 31.01.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No