Allowed

Varun Sood & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 May 2016CRM-M/1875/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR registered under IPC sections 498-A, 323, 406, 506 based on a voluntary compromise. The trial court reported the compromise as voluntary. The High Court applied precedent to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 969 and all consequent proceedings conducted on its basis are quashed qua the petitioners.

Varun Sood & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-1875 of 2016

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-1875 of 2016 Date of Decision: 20.05.2016

¶5

Varun Sood and others

¶6

......Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

¶11

Present: Mr. Priyanka Sud, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Ms. Vibha Dhiman, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

None for respondent No. 2.

¶14

¶15

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J(ORAL)

¶16

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 969 dated 24.11.2012 registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat and all the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶17

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 voluntary and without any pressure. The trial Court has also sent the statements of parties.

¶18

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioners are the only accused and respondent No. 2 is the only aggrieved person in this FIR.

¶19

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR

¶20

GURPREET SINGH 2016.05.23 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶21

-2-

¶22

Crl. Misc. No. M-1875 of 2016

¶23

pending.

¶24

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 Vs. 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 petitioners.

¶25

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

¶26

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE

¶27

May 20, 2016 Gurpreet

¶28

GURPREET SINGH 2016.05.23 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Varun Sood & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varun Sood & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

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

Rohit Sehgal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Nirmal Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Khernesha & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mukand Singh Vs State Ofpb.

Shakuntala and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Another

Lakhwinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.