SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishna Jha And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 4 February, 2020

272
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-39769 of 2019.
Decided on:- February 04, 2020.

Krishna Jha and others
………Petitioners.
Versus

State of Haryana and another
………Respondents.

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

*****

Present:- Mr. S.P. Khera, Advocate for
Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar, A.A.G., Haryana.

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, Advocate for
Mr. K. Arun Singh, Advocate
for respondent No.2-complainant.

HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)

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

quashing of FIR No.619 dated 30.10.2018 under Sections 323, 406, 498-A

and 506 read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sector-31,

Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom

on the basis of compromise dated 18.07.2019 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated September 18, 2019 had directed the

parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their respective

statements recorded with regard to compromise and the Court was directed to

send its report qua genuineness of the compromise.

1 of 3
23-02-2020 12:34:45 :::
CRM-M-39769 of 2019 -2-

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties had appeared before

learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad and got their statements

recorded on 04.11.2019. On the basis of the statements so recorded by the

parties, learned Magistrate has submitted the report dated 04.11.2019 to the

effect that the compromise effected between the parties appears to be without

any threat or pressure from either side and is made out of free volition of the

parties.

The FIR in question has been recorded on the basis of statement

of respondent No.2-complainant Neha Jha. She has already made a statement

before learned Magistrate in support of compromise on 04.11.2019, which

reads as under:

“Stated that the present case FIR NO.619 dated
30.10.2018 under Section 498A, 323, 406, 506 read with 34 IPC
P.S. Sector-31, Faridabad was got registered on my complaint.
Now, due to the intervention of the respectable persons of the
society the matter has been compromised between the parties
amicably and voluntarily without any force, pressure or any sort
of undue influence. No grievance remains against the accused
qua the complaint. I do not want to pursue the present case/FIR
against the accused Krishan Jha, Govind Jha and Durga Devi. I
have no objection of the instant FIR be quashed.”

Learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No.2-

complainant have not disputed the factum of compromise effected between

the parties.

In view of the above, continuation of the proceedings before the

trial Court in the instant FIR qua the petitioners shall be an abuse of the

process of law.

2 of 3
23-02-2020 12:34:45 :::
CRM-M-39769 of 2019 -3-

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gold Quest International Private

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

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

or the civil property disputes with criminal facets, if the parties have entered

into settlement, and it has become 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.

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 and approved by the

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

(2012) 10 SCC 303 as well as the law laid down in Gold Quest International

Private Limited’s case (supra), the present petition is allowed and the FIR

No.619 dated 30.10.2018 under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 read with

Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sector-31, Faridabad (Annexure

P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the

petitioners on the basis of compromise dated 18.07.2019 (Annexure P-2),

however, subject to payment of total costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the

petitioners to the Poor Patients’ Welfare Fund of the Postgraduate Institute of

Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh within a period of

one month from today.

(HARI PAL VERMA)
February 04, 2020 JUDGE
Yag Dutt

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No

3 of 3
23-02-2020 12:34:45 :::

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