Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pankaj Dhiman And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 20 May, 2015
Author: Hari Pal Verma
Bench: Hari Pal Verma
CRM-M-11825 of 2015 1
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA,
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-11825 of 2015
Decided on : 20.05.2015
Pankaj Dhiman and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
Present : Mr. Y.S.Turka, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms.Neelam Kashyap, DAG, Haryana.
1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed
to see judgment?
2. To be referred to reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
Digest?
Hari Pal Verma, J. (Oral)
Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of FIR No.43 dated 29.11.2011, under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, registered against the petitioners at Mahila Thana Sonipat, Haryana (Annexure P/1) on the basis of compromise dated 28.02.2015 alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
On 21.04.2015, this Court has passed the following order:-
"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of the FIR No. 43, dated 29.11.2011 (Annexure P-1), for offence under Sections 498- A, 406, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Mahila Thana, Sonipat, Haryana and subsequent proceedings pending in the Court of Ms. Varsha Jain, JMIC, Sonipat titled 'State of Haryana Vs. Pankaj Dhiman and Others' on the basis of compromise dated 28.02.2015, entered between the parties before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
Notice of motion for 20.05.2015.
At this stage, Mr. Jyoti Dhiman-complainant- respondent No.2 is present in Court and identified by Mr. Y.S. Turka, Advocate for the petitioner. The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa SUDHIR KUMAR Magistrate/Trial Court for recording their respective 2015.05.21 14:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-11825 of 2015 2 statements with regard to compromise/settlement on 29.04.2015.
The Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information as well:-
(i)number of persons arrayed as accused in FIR.
(ii)whether any accused is proclaimed offender.
(iii)whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence.."
In compliance of the above order passed by this Court, the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sonipat, has submitted a report dated 08.05.2015 vide which it is mentioned that parties have appeared before the trial Court and gave their statements without any pressure and with their free will in respect of compromise effected between them.
Learned State counsel has also admitted the factum of compromise effected between the parties. After perusing the statements of the parties and the report of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sonipat, learned State counsel submits that he has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.
Heard.
The petitioners have been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 506 and 34 IPC. They have now amicably effected the compromise with the complainant. The learned Judicial Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sonipat has recorded the statements of the parties with regard to compromise and the report has also been received in this regard. Therefore, continuation of the trial arising out of the impugned FIR would be a sheer abuse of the process of law because chances of conviction are bleak.
Keeping in view the factum of the compromise effected SUDHIR KUMAR 2015.05.21 14:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-11825 of 2015 3 between the private parties and the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal), 1052, (P&H), this petition is accepted and FIR No.43 dated 29.11.2011, under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, registered against the petitioners at Mahila Thana Sonipat, Haryana (Annexure P/1) along with consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.
Petition is accordingly allowed.
[ Hari Pal Verma ] Judge 20.05.2015 sd SUDHIR KUMAR 2015.05.21 14:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh