SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Yogesh Bansal vs State Of Haryana on 30 October, 2018

Crl. Rev. No. 3962 of 2017 (OM) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Rev. No. 3962 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : 30.10.2018

Yogesh Bansal
…… Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana
… Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar, AAG, Haryana.

None for the complainant.

ANITA CHAUDHRY , J.
Report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad

regarding the compromise has been received.

The trial of the petitioner in case FIR No. 152 dated

01.04.2009, registered under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 IPC, Police

Station Old Faridabad, District Faridabad culminated in his conviction

vide order dated 13.06.2014, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

Faridabad. The petitioner was sentenced to the following punishment:-

Under Section 498-A Under Section 323 Under Section 406 IPC
IPC IPC

Simple Imprisonment Simple Imprisonment Simple Imprisonment for

for two years and fine for three months and six months and fine of

of Rs.1,000/-. fine of Rs.500/-. Rs.500/-.

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and in

1 of 3
04-11-2018 15:16:09 :::
Crl. Rev. No. 3962 of 2017 (OM) -2-

default of payment of fine the petitioner was to further undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of 15 days.

The appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the

Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad on 17.08.2017.

Aggrieved with the same the petitioner has preferred the instant

revision petition. During the pendency thereof, it is claimed that the parties

have entered into compromise with the intervention of respectable persons.

The sentence of the petitioner was suspended during the pendency of the

petition and the parties were directed to appear before the CJM, Faridabad

for getting their statements recorded with regard to the genuineness of the

compromise.

Report has been called from the Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Faridabad, after statements of the parties were recorded regarding the

compromise. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad has reported that the

compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. He has also

sent original statements of parties along with the report.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that now good

sense has prevailed and parties have decided to settle the dispute by entering

into a compromise. Counsel says that a petition under Section 13-B of the

Hindu Marriage Act had been filed and in terms of the compromise, the

petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.10 lacs to the complainant. Certified copy of

judgment and decree of divorce has been placed on record in this regard.

Counsel says that all the parties have appeared before the CJM, Faridabad

and have affirmed the factum of compromise. It is prayed that in view of the

compromise, the petitioner may be acquitted.

In the instant case, better sense has prevailed to the parties and

2 of 3
04-11-2018 15:16:09 :::
Crl. Rev. No. 3962 of 2017 (OM) -3-

they have put an end to their grievance and have settled the dispute with

their free will without any pressure or coercion.

Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute, there is no

legal impediment in granting permission to them to compound the offence.

In view of the statements and report of the CJM, Sonepat and the principles

laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh

and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal)

1052, approved by Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab

and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, the instant revision petition is allowed.

Consequently, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by

the Court below is set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges.

(ANITA CHAUDHRY)
JUDGE

30.10.2018
‘Sunil Sehgal’

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3
04-11-2018 15:16:09 :::

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