Farman Kataria vs State Of Haryana And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 3857 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:051992




CRM-M-42800-2021                           1      2023:PHHC:051992

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

(113)                                                  CRM-M-42800-2021
                                                Date of Decision: 12.04.2023


Farman Kataria                                               ...Petitioner

                                  Versus

State of Haryana and Another                                 ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:     Mr. Mohammad Arshad, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.

             Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

                    ****

HARKESH MANUJA, J.(ORAL)

By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,

petitioner prays for quashing of FIR No.300 dated 18.08.2021, registered

under Sections 384, 419, 420 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, 1860 at Police

Station City Sohna, District Gurugram, Haryana (Annexure P-1) along with all

consequential proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise

dated 13.09.2021 (Annexure P-2).

2. In the present case, petitioner in the guise of fake RTO official

stopped the vehicle of the complainant and took Rs.15,000/- for not imposing

challan, resulting into registration of the present FIR.

3. In pursuance to an order dated 30.01.2023 passed by this Court,

whereby the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court for getting

their statements recorded as regards, the veracity of compromise arrived at

between them, report dated 23.02.2023 has been received from the concerned

court, stating that the compromise in the present case is valid, genuine,

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:051992

CRM-M-42800-2021 2 2023:PHHC:051992

voluntary and without any coercion or under influence. There is no other

accused except the present petitioner and the sole complainant namely,

Jitender Bansal. No accused has been declared as proclaimed offender. The

stage of trial was fixed for evidence of prosecution.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once, the

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 other

subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioner, the

dispute being purely personal in nature, there does not appear to be any

impediment as regards quashing of present FIR. He further submits that 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.

5. On the other hand learned State counsel submits that petitioner

has cheated the complainant by taking Rs.15,000/- in the guise of fake RTO

official.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, they having settled

their dispute so as to live peacefully 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 found to be

fully in consonance with the direction issued by the 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.

                                    2 of 3

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:051992




CRM-M-42800-2021                         3       2023:PHHC:051992

7. 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 judgment, the instance petition is disposed of and FIR No.300

dated 18.08.2021, registered under Sections 384, 419, 420 IPC read with

Section 34 IPC, 1860 at Police Station City Sohana, District Gurugram,

Haryana (Annexure P-1) as well as all the subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom are hereby quashed.

8. The aforesaid order shall however, be subject to payment costs of

Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the Punjab and Haryana

High Court Association Lawyer's Family Welfare Fund having Account

No.41564846387 with State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Chandigarh,

within a period of two weeks from today.

                                             (HARKESH MANUJA)
                                                  JUDGE
12.04.2023
anil

            Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
            Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:051992

                                3 of 3