Parveen Kumar And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 5304 P&H

                                                        Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058428




                                                        2023:PHHC:058428

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                 AT CHANDIGARH
                           ****
248                             CRM-M-14920-2022
                                Date of Decision:25.04.2023

Parveen Kumar and Another                          .....Petitioners
                 Vs.
State of Haryana and Another                       .....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:-   Mr. Baljeet Nain, Advocate for
            Mr. Ashish Sindher, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

            Mr. Rishi Lal, Advocate for
            Mr. Rajesh Duhan, Advocate
            for respondent No.2.

                        ****
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for

quashing of F.I.R. No.109 dated 04.08.2021 registered under Sections

363, 366 of the IPC (in report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. police deleted

Sections 363, 366 of the IPC and Sections 323, 34, 341, 506 of the IPC

were added) registered at Police Station Bapoli, District Panipat and all

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise

dated 04.03.2022 (Annexure P-3).

This Court vide order dated 13.02.2023 had directed the

parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded

and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the

genuineness of the compromise.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared

before Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class and got their statements

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058428

2023:PHHC:058428

recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, Learned

Magistrate has submitted report dated 09.03.2023 to the effect that the

compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and

without any coercion or undue influence.

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for

respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between

the parties.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to

continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant F.I.R.

Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench

judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of

Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab

and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and

F.I.R. No.109 dated 04.08.2021 registered under Sections 363, 366 of

the IPC (in report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. police deleted Sections

363, 366 of the IPC and Sections 323, 34, 341, 506 of the IPC were

added) registered at Police Station Bapoli, District Panipat and all

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise

dated 04.03.2022 (Annexure P-3), are quashed qua the petitioners.

April 25, 2023                                         ( DEEPAK GUPTA )
Neetika Tuteja                                              JUDGE
                 Whether Speaking/reasoned        Yes/No
                 Whether Reportable               Yes/No

                                                             Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:058428

                                         2 of 2