Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashwani Pathak vs State Of Haryana And Another on 28 April, 2023
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064441
2023:PHHC:064441
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
256(3) CRM-M-45669-2019
Date of Decision: 28.04.2023
Ashwani Pathak ......... Pe oner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:- Mr. Ja nder Pal Singh, Advocate for the pe oner.
Mr. Manish Bansal, D.A.G, Haryana.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)
FIR No. Dated Police Sta2on Sec2ons
73 29.06.2011 Chhachhrauli, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,
District Yamuna 120-B IPC
Nagar
Seeking quashing of above cap oned FIR based on se7lement arrived at between the par es during media on proceedings arising out of CRM-M-28408-2014, the accused have come up before this Court.
2. Based on se7lement arrived between the par es in CRM-M-28408-2014 Sanjay Kumar Goyal and others Versus State of Punjab and another, in the Media on and Concilia on Centre of this Court, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 14.05.2015 had quashed the FIR qua the pe oners in the said case. The Court had also referred to the report of the mediator dated 17.12.2014.
3. Subsequent to that, vide judgment dated 01.12.2017 another Bench of this Court had quashed the FIR qua one accused i.e. Arun Goyal in CRM-M-25981-2014. At that me, the complainant, who was mother of the pe oner-Arun Goyal had stated that she would have no objec on if the FIR is quashed along with all consequen al proceedings.
4. Seeking quashing of the FIR for the same reasons, the pe oners had come up before this Court under Sec on 482 Cr.P.C.
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 05-05-2023 20:27:30 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064441
CRM-M-45669-2019 2023:PHHC:064441
5. The FIR was registered based on the complaint made by Smt. Santosh Devi. The allega ons were forging her general power of a7orney which was allegedly made in favour of her son Arun Goyal against whom the FIR already stands quashed. The allega ons against the pe oners were of par cipa on and conspiracy at the me of prepara on of said general power of a7orney and further transfer of property on the basis of said power of a7orney. Once the FIR has been quashed against the main accused in whose favour the said general power of a7orney was allegedly executed, there is no reason that why the pe oners, who are neither the main accused nor beneficiary should suffer. If this Court does not disrupt the criminal proceedings at this stage, it is likely to cause suffering, unnecessary harassment amoun ng to miscarriage of jus ce to the pe oners. Even if hypothe cally prosecu on is launched, the result can be well interfered given the absolving of the main accused and death of the complainant. In the en rety of facts and circumstances, the pe on is allowed and above men oned FIR is quashed qua the pe oners. All pending miscellaneous applica ons, if any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
28.04.2023
Jyo -II
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064441
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 05-05-2023 20:27:30 :::