Alim vs State Of Haryana And Another

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Alim vs State Of Haryana And Another on 13 May, 2024

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066797




291
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M No. 12779 of 2024 (O&M)
                                          Date of Decision: 13.05.2024

Alim

                                                             .......... Petitioner
                                        Versus

State of Haryana and another
                                                          .......... Respondents

CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:      Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate,
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
              for respondent No. 1.

              Mr. Hardeep Singh, Advocate for
              Mr. Vipin Sharma, Advocate
              for respondent No. 2.

                                ****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner, by way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeks quashing of FIR No. 108 dated 26.02.2023 (Annexure P-

1) under Sections 323, 34 & 379-B of IPC (Section 201 of IPC added later on), registered at Police Station S.G.M. Nagar, District Faridabad, alongwith all consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated 20.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).

[2] This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 13.03.2024, directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the validity of compromise.

1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 15-05-2024 04:19:08 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066797 CRM-M No. 12779 of 2024 (O&M) -2- [3] In pursuance of above order dated 13.03.2024, a report dated 10.04.2024 has been received from the concerned Court, stating that the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. No accused has been declared as proclaimed offender. [4] Once, the compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 having no objection as regards quashing of FIR as well as all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioner; there does not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR qua the petitioner. Even otherwise, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the present 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.

[5] 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 direction issued by the Court in the case(s) of 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.

[6] Further, learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jayrajsingh Digvijaysinh Rana Versus State of Gujarat and another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 589 and this Court in the case(s) of 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 15-05-2024 04:19:09 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:066797 CRM-M No. 12779 of 2024 (O&M) -3- Joginder Singh & another Versus State of Punjab and another, passed in CRM-M No.23739 of 2010 decided on 27.04.2011, Rajinder Singh Versus State of Punjab & another, passed in CRM-M No.37395 of 2016 decided on 16.05.2017 and Vimal Kalra & others Versus State of Punjab & another, passed in CRM-M No.20355 of 2022, decided on 25.07.2022 submits that partial quashing of the FIR is possible on the basis of a compromise.

[7] Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts, 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 the FIR (supra) as well as all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.

[8] The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the Nishkam Sewa Group (for Charitable Work), run by Punjab & Haryana High Court Lawyers at Chandigarh, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

May 13, 2024                                           ( HARKESH MANUJA )
'dk kamra'                                                  JUDGE

             Whether Speaking/reasoned                  Yes/No

             Whether Reportable                         Yes/No




                                  3 of 3
               ::: Downloaded on - 15-05-2024 04:19:09 :::