Punjab-Haryana High Court
Honey Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Another on 8 May, 2024
SANDEEP SETHI
2024.05.15 00:11
CRM-19371-2024 in/and
CRM-M-3252-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(123)
CRM-19371-2024 in/and
CRM-M-3252-2024
Date of Decision:-08.05.2024
Honey Sharma
veveee Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
beeees Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
3B 2 3
Present: Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.
3B 2 3
ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral)
CRM-19371-2024
The present application is for preponement of the date of
hearing in the main case from 28.08.2024 to some early date on the ground
that the pendency of the main petition is causing unnecessary disharmony
between the parties who are none other than the husband and wife.
For the reasons recorded, the present application is allowed
and the main case is taken up on Board today itself.
CRM-M-3252-2024
1. The present petition is for quashing of the FIR No.214 dated
22.04.2022 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323, 498-A and 506 of IPC,
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this Order/Judgment
SANDEEP SETHI
2024.05.15 00:11
CRM-19371-2024 in/and
CRM-M-3252-2024
registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra,
Haryana, and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise dated 08.12.2023 (Annexure P-2).
2. Mr. Rohit Kumar Rana, Advocate, has put in appearance on
behalf of respondent No.2 and filed his power of attorney, which is taken
on record.
3. Keeping in view the fact that the parties entered into a
compromise, this Court vide order dated 19.02.2024 directed the parties to
appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for getting their statements
recorded in that regard. Pursuant thereto, a report dated 05.03.2024 has
been received from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra,
stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is voluntary and
the same is without any pressure, coercion or undue influence.
4. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent Nos.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that they
have no objection to quashing of the FIR on that basis.
5. Perusal of the aforesaid report establishes that the parties have
amicably settled their dispute, and continuance of criminal prosecution in
such a situation will be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate
conviction are bleak. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be
exercised in such matters. It has been held by Supreme Court of India in
cases Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another 2012(10) SCC 303 and
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2014(6) SCC 406
that criminal cases having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this Order/Judgment
CRM-19371-2024 in/and
CRM-M-3252-2024
those arising out of commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or
family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their
disputes among themselves in a bona fide manner.
6. Consequently, this petition is allowed. FIR No.214 dated
22.04.2022 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323, 498-A and 506 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra,
Haryana, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby
quashed qua the petitioner, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be
deposited by the petitioner and Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by respondent
No.2, within one month from today in Poor Patient Welfare Fund,
PGIMER, Chandigarh.
(ALOK JAIN)
JUDGE
May 08, 2024.
Sandeep
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether Reportable:- Yes/No
SANDEEP SETHI
2024.05.15 00:11
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this Order/Judgment
