SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Saurabh Caplash And Others vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 28 February, 2019

CRM-M-32601 of 2018 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-32601 of 2018

Date of Decision: 28-2-2019

Saurabh Caplash and others …Petitioners

v.

State of Haryana and another …Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI

Present: Mr.Ashwani Gaur, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr.Arun Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

Ms.Monika Jangra, Advocate
for respondent No.2.

RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, J.(ORAL)

Affidavit of Pooja – respondent No.2 has been filed in Court

today. Same is taken on record.

By invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the

petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR No.264 dated 16.6.2015, under

Sections 323, 406, 498A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’),

registered at Police Station Urban Estate, Rohtak, District Rohtak and

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated

16.7.2018 (Annexure P-2).

In the present case, the FIR was registered on the statement of

Pooja – respondent No.2. Now, dispute between the parties has been resolved.

As per compromise, a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act

has been filed in the Family Court at Rohtak.

Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for

respondent No.2 have not disputed that the parties i.e. petitioners, respondent

1 of 2
10-03-2019 23:27:09 :::
CRM-M-32601 of 2018 [2]

No.2 (complainant), have arrived at a settlement with an intent to give burial to

their differences.

Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case

squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court,

in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Keeping in view

authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in

‘Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another’, 2012 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 543

and in the light of facts and circumstances discussed hereinbefore, this Court is

of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would

amount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice

that the same are put to an end.

For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed and FIR No264

dated 16.6.2015, under Sections 323, 406, 498A, 34 IPC, registered at Police

Station Urban Estate, Rohtak, District Rohtak and subsequent proceedings

arising therefrom on the basis of compromise stands quashed qua petitioners.

February 28, 2019 (RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI)
JUDGE
RC

Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No

2 of 2
10-03-2019 23:27:09 :::

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.

STUDY REPORTS

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