SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ravinder Kumar Kalia And Others vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 4 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-11640-2019
Date of decision:4.2.2020

RAVINDER KUMAR KALIA AND OTHERS …Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR …..Respondents

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

Present: Mr. Divjyot S. Sandhu, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Jayender Chandail, Advocate
for the complainant.

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.78 dated 3.4.2018 under

Sections 406 IPC, Police Station Chandimandir, District Panchkula and

proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise effected

between the parties.

2. Pursuant to directions issued by this Court on 13.3.2019, statements of

the parties including the statement of the complainant Sh. Hari Parkash

Sharma have been recorded.

3. The complainant has specifically stated that the accused had taken an

amount of `22.5 lakhs on the pretext of sending his children abroad

regarding which the FIR in question was lodged. He has further stated

that the matter has now been compromised and he has received an amount

of `19 lakhs and that he has no objection, in case, FIR in question is

1 of 2
05-02-2020 04:04:38 :::

-: 2 :- CRM-M-11640-2019

quashed and that the compromise has been entered into without there

being any pressure or coercion. He has however stated that the

compromise has been effected without prejudice to his daughter’s

matrimonial rights.

4. A joint statement of the accused has also been recorded wherein they have

stated that the matter stands compromised.

5. The complainant is present in person along with his counsel and upon

query made by this Court, he has expressed that he has no objection for

quashing of the FIR.

6. In view of the aforesaid compromise and bearing in mind the law laid

down by Full Bench of this Court in 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 Kulwinder

Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, the petition is allowed and FIR

No.78 dated 3.4.2018 under Sections 406 IPC, Police Station

Chandimandir, District Panchkula and all the consequent proceedings

arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

7. It is however clarified that the complainant’s daughter would be at liberty

to have recourse to law as far as her matrimonial rights are concerned.

8. Needless to mention that the amount of `19 lakhs which is stated to have

been invested in FDR in Central Bank of India, Sector 25, Panchkula may

be withdrawn by the complainant. The Bank Manager, shall render

requisite assistance.

( GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
4.2.2020 JUDGE
Gaurav Sorot
Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No
Whether reportable? Yes / No

2 of 2
05-02-2020 04:04:38 :::

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