CRM-M No. 18203 of 2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M No. 18203 of 2017
Date of Decision:-24.09.2018

Sanjay Adhana and others

…Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another

…Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:- Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ankur Jain, Advocate
for respondent No.2.

JAISHREE THAKUR J.(Oral)

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.323 dated 28.12.2014,

under Section 354 IPC, registered at Police Station Kurukshetra, District

Kurukshetra (Annexure P/1) and all subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure P/2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-

on the allegations that the accused-petitioners after consuming liquor at

public place forcibly tried to enter her room. Now with the intervention of

respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between

1 of 3
02-10-2018 09:05:41 :::
CRM-M No. 18203 of 2017 -2-

the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a

compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa

Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the

compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from

Judicial Magistrate First Class at Kurukshetra, stating that the compromise

arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any

one and the same is genuine one.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, on instructions

from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant-

respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case

the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no

objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the record.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a

loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between

the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After

considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that

both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal

prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate

conviction are bleak.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has

2 of 3
02-10-2018 09:05:42 :::
CRM-M No. 18203 of 2017 -3-

been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and

another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.323 dated

28.12.2014, under Section 354 IPC, registered at Police Station

Kurukshetra, District Kurukshetra (Annexure P/1) and all subsequent

proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.

The petition stands disposed of.

September 24, 2018 ( JAISHREE THAKUR )
Vijay Asija JUDGE

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

3 of 3
02-10-2018 09:05:42 :::