Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shilpy Goel And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 29 April, 2010
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-9998 of 2009
Date of Decision:April 29, 2010
Shilpy Goel and others
---Petitioners
versus
State of Haryana and others
---Respondents
Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH
***
Present: Mr. J.S.Hooda, Advocate,
for the petitioners
Ms. Shalini Attri, Deputy Advocate General,
Haryana
***
GURDEV SINGH, J.
Petitioners-Shilpy Goel, Krishna Singla and Sachin Singla have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIR No. 272 dated 20.8.2008 registered under Sections 115 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in Police Station Palm Vihar, Gurgaon, on the basis of the compromise dated 5.3.2009 (Annexure P-2).
The report of the trial court was called if the parties have voluntarily entered into the said compromise. It has been reported by the trial court that the complainant appeared before it and admitted that he compromised the matter without any undue influence, coercion and of his Crl. Misc. No. M-9998 of 2009 -2- free will.
As per that compromise (Annexure P-2), the parties were to perform some of the conditions before quashing of the FIR. One of the condition was that petitioner No. 1 and son of respondent No. 4 were to obtain a decree of divorce from the Court. The petitioners were directed to place on record the certified copy of the decree of divorce. The same has been placed on the record. One of the condition in the compromise was for giving diamond necklace and two lacs to petitioner No. 1. She is present in the Court and her statement is recorded, wherein she has stated that diamond necklace and Rs. two lacs have already been given to her. Those conditions of the compromise stand satisfied.
It was held by Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, that the parties can enter into a compromise even with regard to the offences which are non-compoundable and FIR can be quashed on the basis of such a compromise.
In fact the dispute had arisen between the parties out of the matrimonial alliance and those disputes have been settled amicably. In view of the compromise, so entered into between the parties, the FIR and the subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE April 29, 2010 PARAMJIT