Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC based on a settled compromise between parties. The High Court, relying on a Full Bench decision, held that quashing was appropriate and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.
FIR No.10 dated 14.4.2002 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M 22662 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.2.2009
Tarun Verma
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARBANS LAL
Present: Mr.RS Malik, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr.Tarunveer Vashist, Addl.A.G., Haryana
Mr.Ajit Atri, Advocate for respondent No.2. Complainant.
Harbans Lal, J.(Oral)
This petition has been moved by Tarun Verma under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.10 dated 14.4.2002, registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mahila, District Sonepat and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground of compromise.
The grounds pleaded are that the parties have compromised the matter with the intervention of the conciliation committee, therefore, no useful purpose would be served if the proceedings are allowed to continue. In Annexure P-2, it has been mentioned that both the parties have mutually settled the matter and the statements have been recorded wherein the complainant party has stated that she has no objection, if the FIR in question is quashed as the matter has been compromised.
CRM No.M 22662 of 2008 (O&M)
-2-
Mr.Ajit Atri, Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.2- complainant has also conceded this fact.
In view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in re: Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052, the Court is competent to quash the proceedings on the basis of compromise. Sequelly, this petition is accepted and FIR No.10 dated 14.4.2002, registered under Sections 498A, 406, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mahila, District Sonepat and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
February 16, 2009 gsv
(Harbans Lal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash FIR proceedings under Section 482 CrPC on the grounds of mutual compromise between parties.
Whether the existence of a settlement and unobjection in all statements serves as sufficient basis to quash criminal proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and anotherFollowed¶19
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Tarun Verma
State of Haryana
Other
Harbans Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
