Allowed

Krishna Verma & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Oct 2016CRM-M/12030/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under various IPC sections relying on a verified compromise. The High Court accepted the trial court's report on the compromise's genuineness and relied on precedents to allow the petition, quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The FIR No. 308 and all consequent proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner.

Krishna Verma & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M-12030 of 2016(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-12030 of 2016(O&M) Date of Order:26.10.2016

¶5

Krishna Verma and another ..Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Haryana and another

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

¶10

Present: Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Sandeep Vashist, DAG, Haryana.

¶12

Mr. P.S.Binder, Advocate, for respondent no.2.

¶13

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J. (Oral)

¶14

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.308, dated 05.10.2013, registered under Section 406, 498-A, 120-B and 506 IPC Police Station Parao, Ambala Cantt, Distt. Ambala and all the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶15

Report has been received from the trial Court after statements of the parties were recorded regarding the compromise. The trial Court has reported that the compromise is genuine, voluntarily and out of free will of the parties. The trial court has also sent original statements of parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioner is the only accused and respondent no.2 is the only Naresh Kumar 2016.11.03 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M-12030 of 2016(O&M)

¶18

-2-

¶19

aggrieved person in this FIR.

¶20

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR

¶21

pending.

¶22

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal), 1052 , approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof are quashed qua the petitioner.

¶23

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below.

¶24

October 26, 2016 (ANITA CHAUDHRY) nt JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶25

Naresh Kumar 2016.11.03 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Krishna Verma & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Verma & Anr. v. State of Haryana & 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

Raj Singla Vs State of Punjab

Vishal Manchanda and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Nafe Singh Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Amit Thakur and Others Vs Saloni and Another

Harpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jaipal and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another