Quashed

Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2014CRM-M/25696/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal petition sought quashing of an FIR and consequent conviction order under compounding provisions. Relying on the existence of a registered divorce by mutual consent and a prior Division Bench ruling, the court quashed the proceedings regarding the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 185, the judgment of conviction dated 14.8.2013, and the order of sentence dated 17.8.2013 were quashed; petitioner is acquitted of all charges.

Anil Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM-M-25696-2014

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶4

CHANDIGARH

¶5

CRM-M-25696-2014

¶6

Date of Decision: December 5, 2014

Anil Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

¶11

...Respondent s

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶13

Present: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 1.

¶15

Mr. Sandeep Jain, Advocate, for Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

¶16

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J. (Oral)

¶17

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C., is for quashing of FIR No. 185, dated 18.7.2011 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 406, 498-A and 506, IPC, registered at Police Station, Trarori, District Karnal, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction dated 14.8.2013 and the order of sentence dated

¶18

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.12.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶19

¶20

CRM-M-25696-2014

¶21

17.8.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-4).

¶22

Vide order dated 12.9.2014, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The said Court was also directed to send a report in that regard. 3. In compliance of the above, the petitioner, Anil Kumar, as well as respondent No. 2/complainant, Poonam, did appear before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, and got recorded their statements with regard to the compromise. The copies of the statements suffered by the petitioner and respondent No. 2/complainant with regard to the compromise along with the report of the learned Court below have been received.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR was lodged against three persons, i.e. the petitioner and his parents. Learned Trial Court had acquitted the parents of the petitioner, but convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A, IPC, and awarded different sentences. The petitioner has challenged the said judgment of conviction and sentence before the Court of Session and the said appeal is pending adjudication. During pendency of the said appeal, better sense has prevailed and

¶24

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.12.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶25

¶26

CRM-M-25696-2014

¶27

respondent No. 2/complainant has sorted out all her grievances with the petitioner and effected a compromise. As a result thereof, both of them filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the learned District Judge, Karnal, and the same was accepted and a decree of divorce by mutual consent was passed on 21.7.2014. All the terms and conditions of the compromise have already been materialized. He further contends that in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the matter of Sube Singh and another v. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 102, this Court can quash the proceedings even if pending at appellate stage.

¶28

Learned counsel for the State has not disputed the factum of the compromise between the husband and the wife including the statements suffered by them before the learned Court below. He has also gone through the report received from the learned Court below and submits that he has no objection if the impugned FIR and the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the compromise.

¶29

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has also very fairly conceded that a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent has been granted in favour of the petitioner and the respondent No. 2/complainant.

¶30

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.12.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶31

¶32

CRM-M-25696-2014

¶33

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

¶34

The present criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute. The parents of the petitioner were acquitted by the learned Trial Court while he (petitioner) was held guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A, IPC. The said judgment of conviction and the order of sentence is under appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. In the meantime, good sense prevailed and both the private factions resolved their dispute and effected a compromise. The factum of the said compromise has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner and respondent No. 2 had also suffered their respective statements before the learned Court below and the report to that effect has also been received from the learned Trial Court. It is settled law by now that the proceedings pending before the Appellate Court can be quashed on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly placed reliance on the ratio of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the matter of Sube Singh (supra) .

¶35

Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the ratio of

¶36

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.12.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶37

CRM-M-25696-2014 5

¶38

the judgment in the case of Sube Singh (supra) , this petition is accepted and FIR No. 185, dated 18.7.2011 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 406, 498-A and 506, IPC, registered at Police Station, Trarori, District Karnal, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction dated 14.8.2013 and the order of sentence dated 17.8.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-4) and the petitioner is acquitted all the charges levelled against him.

¶39

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) December 5, 2014 JUDGE Pkapoor

¶40

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.12.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Asha Rani Vs Senior Superintendent of Police and Ors.

Gaurav Jain and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Sunil & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Malagar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kawalpreet Singh Chahal Vs State of Punjab

Gurbaksh Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.