Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 284
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sudip Ahluwalia, J.
Naveen Kumar @ Navin Singh Chauhan - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana & Anr. - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (M ) No. 35263 of 2020
Decided On : 08-01-2021
Prashant S Chauhan, Advocate, Vishal Malik, Advocate, Baljeet Beniwal, Advocate
Headnote:
Compromise - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - The court allowed the quashing of criminal proceedings based on the genuine compromise reached between the parties, following the principles established in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another.
Fact of the Case:
The accused filed a petition seeking the quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings based on a compromise reached with the complainant, which was found to be genuine by the Judicial Magistrate.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the petition, considering the genuine compromise and the lack of utility in continuing the criminal proceedings when the complainant had herself compromised the dispute with the accused.
Issues: Quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings based on compromise
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, which emphasized the acceptance of genuine compromises as a ground for quashing criminal proceedings.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the FIR and all consequential proceedings were quashed in favor of the petitioner/accused.
JUDGMENT
Sudip Ahluwalia, J. - In this petition, the Petitioner, who is the accused in F.I.R No.280, dated 13.07.2017, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 341, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC'), registered at Police Station Kanina, District Mahendergarh (Haryana) (Annexure P-1), has prayed for quashing of F.I.R. with all subsequent proceedings pending therefrom, on the basis of compromise.
2. Now the Complainant has arrived at a settlement with the accused vide Compromise (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by her. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kanina, vide report dated 25.11.2020 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure.
3. Respondent No. 2 is represented by her Counsel who does not dispute the factum of compromise.
4. In view of the report of the Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kanina, and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", (2012) 4 RCR(Cri) 543
and "Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another", (2014) 6 SCC 466
, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping with the criminal proceedings pending, since the Complainant has herself compromised the dispute with the Petitioner/accused.
5. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. F.I.R No.280, dated 13.07.2017, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 341, 323, 34 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Kanina, District Mahendergarh (Haryana) (Annexure P-1), and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the Petitioner.
