Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vidya Singh & Anr vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 1 December, 2017
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
122
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-15025 of 2016 (O&M)
Date of Decision: December 01, 2017
Vidya Singh and others
...Petitioners
VERSUS
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Dhawal Bhandari, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Brijesh Sharma, Asstt. Advocate General, Haryana
for the respondent-State.
Mr.Johan Kumar, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against respondents State of Haryana and Ranvir Singh for quashing the FIR No.344 dated 12.06.2015 under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B IPC and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/statements dated 01.12.2015 of petitioners and respondent No.2 as recorded before learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Faridabad.
Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 appeared and contested the petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2017 20:23:02 ::: CRM No.M-15025 of 2016 -2- From the record, I find that in the present case, parties were directed to appear before trial Court to get recorded their statements regarding compromise. Respondent No.2-complainant made statement before learned trial Court that he does not want to compromise the matter with the accused persons because accused persons have not compromised the matter of FIR No.390/15 under Sections 147, 448, 506 IPC, which arose from the same dispute.
Today also, before this Court, learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that there is no compromise, therefore, the FIR should not be quashed on the basis of the compromise.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances and in view of the statement of respondent No.2 before the trial court as well as statement of learned counsel for respondent No.2 before this Court and also in view of the fact that there is no compromise between the parties, the FIR cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.
Therefore, the present petition for quashing the FIR on the basis of compromise has no merit and the same is dismissed.
However, the petitioners are at liberty to file petition for quashing the FIR on merits, if so desired.
December 01, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH)
Vgulati JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2017 20:23:03 :::