SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sweety Sachdeva And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 19 March, 2018

CRM-M-2731 of 2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-2731 of 2018
Date of decision:19.3.2018

Sweety Sachdeva and another
…..Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another
…..Respondents

****

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU

****

Present: Mr. Prateek Rathee, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Vikas Chopra, DAG, Haryana
for respondent No.1.

Mr. Raghav Dayal Gupta, Advocate
for respondent No.2.

****

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J. (ORAL)

The dispute is between husband and wife. The other criminal

case i.e. FIR No. 208 of 2016 under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the

Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh has already

been quashed by way of writ petition bearing No. W.P.(CRL) 3672 of

2016 by High Court of Delhi on the basis of compromise effected

1 of 4
09-04-2018 05:29:37 :::
CRM-M-2731 of 2018 -2-

between the parties. The present petition is also filed for quashing of FIR

No. 281 dated 27.08.2015 under Sections 468, 471, 467, 420, 120-B, 506

and 384 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station DLF Phase-

1, Gurugram, Haryana on the basis of compromise entered into between

the parties.

2. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the

paper book.

3. Both the parties were directed by this Court vide order dated

15.02.2018 to appear before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/ Trial Court and

to get their statements recorded and in pursuance thereof, learned Judicial

Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram recorded the statements of both the parties

and submitted a report dated 27.02.2018 and operative part of the same

reads as under:

‘Today, an application was moved by accused through

counsel to record the statements of parties regarding

compromise. Statements of complainant Sh. Manish

Sachdeva and accused/applicants namely Ms. Swity

Sachdeva and Sh. Rohan Barua recorded in the

presence of their respective counsels regarding

compromise between the parties. A document/MOU

Ex. C1 containing settlement between the parties has

also been placed on the case file stating that the

original is filed in the Hon’ble High Court. Before

recording the statement it was inquired from both the

parties whether they are deposing voluntarily to

2 of 4
09-04-2018 05:29:38 :::
CRM-M-2731 of 2018 -3-

which they replied in affirmative. This Court finds no

other suspicious circumstances to doubt the

voluntariness of the parties. As per FIR there are only

two accused namely Ms. Swity Sachdeva and Sh.

Rohan Barua who are already appearing. Certified

copies of statements of both the parties as well as

document Ex. C1 are attached herewith for the kind

perusal of Hon’ble Punjab Haryana High Court.’

A perusal of the report reveals that the compromise entered

into between the parties is voluntary and without any fear, coercion,

inducement or threat. Even before this Court also, the parties are not

disputing the factum of compromise arrived at between them.

4. No objection has been raised by the learned State counsel

and learned counsel for respondent No.2 on a specific query put to them

by the Court with regard to quashing of the FIR as well as all other

consequential proceedings on the basis of the compromise effected

between the parties in this case. Learned State counsel further submits

that untraced report in this case has been prepared by the police.

5. In view of the above, this Court is fully convinced that the

offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect any public peace

or tranquillity and thus quashing of FIR in question along with all

consequential proceedings on the basis of compromise would bring peace

and harmony to secure the ends of justice. Consequently, the aforesaid

FIR and all consequential proceedings resulting therefrom are quashed

qua petitioner(s).

3 of 4
09-04-2018 05:29:38 :::
CRM-M-2731 of 2018 -4-

6. Petition is allowed.

( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU)
19.03.2018 JUDGE
rashmi

1. Whether reportable? Yes / No

2. Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No

4 of 4
09-04-2018 05:29:38 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh