SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Manish Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 4 October, 2017

CRM No.M-11231 of 2017 [1]


Criminal Misc. No. M- 11231 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: October 4 , 2017.

Manish Kumar …… PETITIONER(s)


State of Haryana and another …… RESPONDENT (s)


Present: Mr. Manish Mehta, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Arjun Singh Yadav, AAG, Haryana.

None for respondent No.2.


Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.49 dated

11.07.2016 under Sections 323/406/498A/506/34 IPC registered at Police

Station Women Narnaul, District Mahendergarh and all other consequential

proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between

the parties.

The abovesaid FIR was registered at the instance of respondent No.2

due to matrimonial discord with her husband i.e., the petitioner. The matter has

been resolved between the parties with the intervention of respectables and

relatives. The petitioner and respondent No.2 decided to bury the hatchet and

have started living together in peace and harmony.

1 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:48 :::
CRM No.M-11231 of 2017 [2]

This Court on 31.05.2017 directed the parties to appear before

learned trial court for recording their statements in respect to the above-

mentioned compromise. Learned trial court was directed to submit a report

regarding the genuineness of the compromise, as to whether it has been arrived at

out of the free will and volition of the parties without any coercion, fear or undue

influence. Learned trial court was also directed to intimate whether any of the

accused are absconding/proclaimed offenders and whether any other case is

pending against them. Information was sought as to whether all affected persons

are a party to the settlement.

Pursuant to order dated 31.05.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narnaul and their joint statement was

recorded on 03.07.2017 to the effect that they have resolved their matrimonial

dispute in an amicable manner and are residing together as husband and wife

alongwith their minor daughter. It is stated that respondent No.2 has no

objection in case the abovesaid FIR is quashed against the accused petitioner.

The settlement, it is stated, has been arrived at out of their free will and volition

without any kind of pressure.

As per report dated 03.07.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Narnaul, satisfaction is expressed that the compromise

between the parties is genuine and voluntary, arrived at without any pressure or

coercion. Petitioner is not reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of

the parties are appended alongwith the said report.

Mr. Ketan Antial, Advocate had earlier appeared on behalf of

respondent No.2 before this Court on 03.04.2017 and affirmed that the parties

were residing together.

2 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:49 :::
CRM No.M-11231 of 2017 [3]

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sarika,

Police Station Women, Narnaul, verifies that the petitioner and respondent No.2

are living together as husband and wife in their matrimonial home. It is

submitted that as the abovesaid FIR arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the State

has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in question as well as all

consequential proceedings on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the


In Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and

another 2007 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, a five member Bench of this Court has

observed as under:-

“The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of
harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the
power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is used to
enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social
amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of

Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 has observed that it becomes the duty of the Court

to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be

in the interest of justice to quash the abovesaid FIR as no useful purpose would

be served by continuance of the present proceedings. It will merely lead to

wastage of precious time of the court and would be an exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.49 dated 11.07.2016

under Sections 323/406/498A/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station Women

Narnaul, District Mahendergarh alongwith all consequential proceedings are,

hereby, quashed.

3 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:49 :::
CRM No.M-11231 of 2017 [4]

However, liberty is afforded to respondent No.2 to file necessary

application for revival of the proceedings in the above said FIR, in case the terms

and conditions of settlement between the parties are not adhered to by the

petitioner or it is found that the settlement was a mere ruse to have the aforesaid

FIR quashed.

October 4 , 2017. JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

4 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:49 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments


Copyright © 2024 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