SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Naveen Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 13 May, 2019


Date of decision:13.05.2019

NAVEEN KUMAR … Petitioner




Present: Mr. Ankit Aggarwal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Mr. Manish Bansal, DAG, Haryana,
for respondent No.1.

None for respondent No.2.


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

quashing of F.I.R. No.163 dated 08.12.2018 registered under Sections 120-

B, 323, 406, 498A, 506 of SectionIPC at Police Station Jathlana, Yamuna Nagar

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

basis of compromise deed dated 14.01.2019 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 24.01.2019 had directed the parties

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

learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and got

their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned
1 of 3
09-06-2019 21:11:31 :::
CRM-M-3136-2019 -2-

Magistrate has submitted report dated 05.03.2019 to the effect that the

compromise is genuine and has been effected between the parties with their


Though today none has put in appearance on behalf of

respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Deepa but no prejudice would be

caused to her as she (first party) had already suffered a joint statement along

with the petitioner (second party) with regard to compromise before learned

Magistrate on 28.02.2019. The same is reproduced as under:-

“That due to the intervention of the respectables of the

society the first party and the second party have compromised

the matter in dispute. The first party does not want to pursue

the matter and compromise the same and the second party has

also apologized for their act committed by them and assure that

they will not repeat the same in future. Our statement has been

recorded in english after having been explained to us and we

have no objection in this regard.”

Learned State counsel has filed the reply by way of affidavit of

Kushal Singh, HPS, DSP, Radour, District Yamuna Nagar, in court today on

behalf of respondent No.1, which is taken on record. On the strength of said

reply, he has submitted that in the aforesaid FIR, police has already prepared

cancellation report on 10.04.2019 and the same is being in process for its

presentation before the court.

At this stage, counsel for the petitioner states that pursuant to

the compromise so entered between the parties, petitioner and respondent

No.2 are staying together as husband and wife.

2 of 3
09-06-2019 21:11:31 :::
CRM-M-3136-2019 -3-

Considering the fact that there is no serious contest by the State

as they have already prepared cancellation report and even otherwise, the

parties are staying together as husband and wife, no useful purpose would be

served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant


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 SectionArticle 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 also in the light of Gold Quest International Private

Limited’s case (supra), this petition is allowed and F.I.R. No.163 dated

08.12.2018 registered under Sections 120-B, Section323, Section406, Section498A, Section506 of IPC at

Police Station Jathlana, Yamuna Nagar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of

compromise deed dated 14.01.2019 (Annexure P-2).

Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
09-06-2019 21:11:31 :::

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