Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5660 P&H
Judgement Date : 28 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064417
2023:PHHC:064417
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
256(1) CRM-M-29731-2018
Date of Decision: 28.04.2023
Ritu Goyal ......... Pe oner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:- Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the pe oner.
Mr. Manish Bansal, D.A.G, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)
FIR No. Dated Police Sta3on Sec3ons
73 29.06.2011 Chhachhrauli, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,
District Yamuna 120-B IPC
Nagar
Seeking quashing of above cap oned FIR based on se6lement arrived at
between the par es during media on proceedings arising out of CRM-M-28408-2014, the
accused have come up before this Court.
2. Based on se6lement arrived between the par es in CRM-M-28408-2014
Sanjay Kumar Goyal and others Versus State of Punjab and another, in the Media on and
Concilia on Centre of this Court, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated
14.05.2015 had quashed the FIR qua the pe oners in the said case. The Court had also
referred to the report of the mediator dated 17.12.2014.
3. Subsequent to that, vide judgment dated 01.12.2017 another Bench of this
Court had quashed the FIR qua one accused i.e. Arun Goyal in CRM-M-25981-2014. At that
me, the complainant, who was mother of the pe oner-Arun Goyal had stated that she
would have no objec on if the FIR is quashed along with all consequen al proceedings.
4. Seeking quashing of the FIR for the same reasons, the pe oners had come
up before this Court under Sec on 482 Cr.P.C.
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064417
CRM-M-29731-2018 2023:PHHC:064417
5. The FIR was registered based on the complaint made by Smt. Santosh Devi.
The allega ons were forging her general power of a6orney which was allegedly made in
favour of her son Arun Goyal against whom the FIR already stands quashed. The allega ons
against the pe oners were of par cipa on and conspiracy at the me of prepara on of
said general power of a6orney and further transfer of property on the basis of said power
of a6orney. Once the FIR has been quashed against the main accused, who is husband of
the pe oner in whose favour the said general power of a6orney was allegedly executed,
there is no reason that why the proceeding against her con nue. No doubt, she is
beneficiary but she is daughter-in-law of the complainant and wife of the main accused
against whom FIR has already been quashed. If this Court does not disrupt the criminal
proceedings at this stage, it is likely to cause suffering, unnecessary harassment amoun ng
to miscarriage of jus ce to the pe oners. Even if hypothe cally prosecu on is launched,
the result can be well interfered given the absolving of the main accused and death of the
complainant. In the en rety of facts and circumstances, the pe on is allowed and above
men oned FIR is quashed qua the pe oners. All pending miscellaneous applica ons, if
any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
28.04.2023
Jyo -II
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064417
2 of 2
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!