Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravi Yadav vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 5 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031172
1
CRM-M- 4978-2024 2024:PHHC:031172
309 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M- 4978-2024
Date of decision:05.03.2024
RAVI YADAV ....PETITIONER
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR ....RESPONDENTS
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY
Present: - Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Dinesh Saini, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL)
1. The instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed
seeking quashing of the Complaint No.1356 dated 15.02.2016 titled as "M/s
Yadav Transport Corporation Versus Ravi Yadav" (Annexure P-1) under
Section 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, read with Section
420 of IPC as well as setting aside the impugned judgment dated 29.03.2017
and order of sentence dated 30.03.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate
Ist Class, Gurugram (Annexure P-2), whereby the petitioner was held guilty
therein and convicted for a period of one year. The petitioner has also sought
quashing of the judgment dated 06.07.2022 passed in CRA-204-2017 passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram (Annexure P-3) whereby
the appeal preferred by the petitioner had been dismissed vide order dated
06.07.2022. The petitioner has sought quashing of the aforesaid complaint
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031172
CRM-M- 4978-2024 2024:PHHC:031172
and judgments on the basis of compromise dated 05.08.2023 (Annexure P-4)
executed between the parties.
2. With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the
society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated
05.08.2023 (Annexure P-4), which is duly signed by them. The matter was
referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to
report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the
parties. A photocopy of e-receipt of costs of Rs. 10,000/- (each) has been
placed on record in compliance of the order dated 14.02.2024.
3. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram vide report dated
02.03.2024, has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between
the parties is genuine and without any pressure.
4. Respondents No. 2 is represented by his counsel and do not
oppose the compromise.
5. In view of the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram
and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and "Narinder
Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another", (2014) 6 SCC 466, this
Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping with
the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself
compromised the dispute with the petitioner/ accused persons.
6. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. Complaint
No.1356 dated 15.02.2016 titled as "M/s Yadav Transport Corporation
Versus Ravi Yadav" (Annexure P-1) under Section 138 and 142 of Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881, read with Section 420 of IPC as well as impugned
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031172
CRM-M- 4978-2024 2024:PHHC:031172
judgment dated 29.03.2017 and order of sentence dated 30.03.2017 passed by
learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram (Annexure P-2) and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis
of compromise qua the present petitioner.
(SANJIV BERRY)
JUDGE
05.03.2024
Anu
i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031172
3 of 3
