SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Hemant Pasricha And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 16 March, 2020

CRM-M-40732-2019 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

276
CRM-M-40732-2019
Date of Decision:16.03.2020

Hemant Pasricha and others …..Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another …..Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA.

Present: Mr. Amaninder Singh Sekhon, Advocate,
for the petitioners.

Ms. Ruchika Sabharwal, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vikas Sonak, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.

****

HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)

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

quashing of FIR No.283 dated 04.09.2013 under Sections 498-A, 120-B

IPC (the offence under Section 406 IPC has been added, whereas the

offence under Section 120-B IPC was deleted later on), registered at Police

Station City Kotwali Faridkot, District Faridkot(Annexure P-1) and all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise

dated 16.08.2019(Annexure P-2).

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that there is no PO

order against petitioner Nos.1 to 3. Though PO proceedings have been

initiated against petitioner No.4, but till date he has not been declared PO.

1 of 3
22-03-2020 01:17:37 :::
CRM-M-40732-2019 2

This Court vide order dated 07.01.2020 had directed the parties

to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate 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, the parties have appeared

before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot and got their statements

recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has

submitted report dated 12.02.2020 to the effect that the compromise is

genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Mamta Rani, has made

a statement with regard to compromise before learned Magistrate on

03.02.2020. The same is reproduced as under:-

“Stated that present FIR No.283 dated 4.9.2013, under
Sections 498-A, 406, 34 IPC, PS City, Faridkot was got
registered by me against the accused Hemant Pasricha,
Rakesh Kumar, Krishan Rani alias Guddi alias Komal
Paricha and Pankush alias Pankush Pasricha. Now, with
the intervention of the respectables of the society,
compromise has been effected between us. Compromise
effected between us is genuine, voluntary and without any
pressure or coercion. I have no objection if the present
FIR and as well as all the proceedings arising out of it are
quashed. Photocopy of my Aadhaar Card is Ex.C1.”

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.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gold Quest International Private

Limited Versus State of Tamil Nadu and others-2014 (4) RCR (Criminal)

2 of 3
22-03-2020 01:17:37 :::
CRM-M-40732-2019 3

206 has held that when the disputes are substantially matrimonial in nature,

or are civil property disputes with criminal facets, if the parties enter into a

settlement, and it becomes clear that there are no chances of conviction,

there is no illegality in quashing the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Thus, 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, as approved by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others

(2012) 10 SCC 303 also, in the light of Gold Quest International Private

Limited’s case (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.283 dated

04.09.2013 under Sections 498-A, 120-B IPC (the offence under Section

406 IPC has been added, whereas the offence under Section 120-B IPC was

deleted later on), registered at Police Station City Kotwali Faridkot,

District Faridkot(Annexure P-1) and all the consequential proceedings

arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of

compromise dated 16.08.2019(Annexure P-2), subject to payment of costs

of `25,000/- to be paid by the petitioners, within a period of one month from

today with the Poor Patients’ Welfare Fund of Post Graduate Institute of

Medical Education and Research(PGIMER), Chandigarh.

March 16, 2020 (HARI PAL VERMA)
seema JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No

3 of 3
22-03-2020 01:17:37 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation