Allowed

Parveen Kumar v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Oct 2012CRM-M/20613/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a petition for quashing an FIR registered under various IPC sections. Relying on a voluntary compromise and a Magistrate's report confirming its validity, the Court quashed proceedings against the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. citing personal nature of the dispute and absence of public policy issues.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.157 dated 10.3.2004 and all consequential proceedings are quashed qua petitioner Parveen Kumar.

Parveen Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-20613 of 2012 Date of Decision: October 10, 2012

Parveen Kumar

..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & another

¶7

..... RESPONDENT(S)

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶9

PRESENT: - Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Shekhar Mudgal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr. Sanjeev Roy, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶12

. . .

¶13

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J (Oral)

¶14

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.157 dated 10.3.2004, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B, IPC, registered at Police Station, Old Faridabad, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, qua petitioner, Parveen Kumar son of Teekam Singh.

¶15

Vide order dated 4.9.2012, this Court had

¶16

Crl. Misc. No.M-20613 of 2012 [2]

¶17

directed the affected parties to appear before the learned Trial Court on 19.9.2012 for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise and the said Court was also directed to send a detailed report in that regard.

¶18

In compliance of the above, respondent No.2-complainant, Vimal Abhi, and the petitioner did appear before the Court below and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise. Respondent No.2, Vimal Abhi, stated that he had voluntarily and without any pressure effected the compromise with the petitioner, Parveen Kumar, and, therefore, he had no grudge against him and the proceedings might be quashed qua him. Similar statement with regard to the compromise was suffered by Parveen Kumar, petitioner.

¶19

Report received from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad, reveals that the statements suffered by both the persons were voluntary. The compromise effected between the parties was without any fear or pressure.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 – complainant has admitted the factum of compromise and

¶21

Crl. Misc. No.M-20613 of 2012 [3]

¶22

has no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioner, Parveen Kumar.

¶23

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Veerpal, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station, Old Faridabad, also admits the factum of compromise. Learned counsel for the State has perused the statements suffered by the private parties before the learned Court below and gone through the report submitted by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad, and has no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR qua the petitioner can be quashed in spite of the fact that respondent No.2 – complainant has not effected the compromise with co-accused of the petitioner. To buttress his statement, he has placed reliance on Parambir Singh Gill vs. Malkiat Kaur, 2010 (1) RCR (Criminal) 256 .

¶25

Heard.

¶26

The dispute among the private parties is of personal nature. Due to intervention of the respectable

¶27

Crl. Misc. No.M-20613 of 2012 [4]

¶28

and elderly people of the society, they have sorted out their dispute and effected a compromise. Vimal Abhi (respondent No.2) and Parveen Kumar (petitioner) have suffered their statements with regard to the compromise before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad. The report received from the said Court reveals that the compromise effected between them was without any pressure or coercion, moreover, voluntary one. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 – complainant have no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner.

¶29

In Parambir Singh Gills's case (supra) , this Court had held that where the complainant had entered into a compromise with one accused out of seven, then the proceedings qua one accused can be quashed in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶30

Keeping in view the above factual position, the pendency of the FIR and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence are weak.

¶31

Considering all the facts and

¶32

Crl. Misc. No.M-20613 of 2012 [5]

¶33

circumstances of the case and the ratio of the judgment passed by a 5 Judge Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , the present petition is allowed and FIR No.157 dated 10.3.2004, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station, Old Faridabad, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua petitioner Parveen Kumar.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the above order, petitioner Parveen Kumar would withdraw the complainant titled “Parveen Kumar vs. Vimal Abhi” pending before the learned Judicial

¶35

Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad.

¶36

(Naresh Kumar Sanghi) October 10, 2012 Judge avin

Parveen Kumar v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parveen Kumar v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaspal Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Tarsem Singh Vs State of Punjab

Rajinder Singh Vs State of Haryana

Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Major Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Darshan Singh Vs State of Punjab