Allowed

Subhanu Vijh v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 May 2017CRM-M/10094/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A and 506 IPC. Relying on a genuine settlement agreement aimed at peace, the Court invoked inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, citing Gian Singh, holding continued proceedings would be an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.180 dated 08.09.2016 and proceedings therefrom quashed qua the petitioner.

Subhanu Vijh Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM No.M-10094 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No.M-10094 of 2017 Decided on: 23.05.2017

Subhanu Vijh

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL

¶10

Present : Mr. Prem Meet Anand, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

Mr. Lokesh Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2/complainant.

¶13

REKHA MITTAL, J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No.180 dated 08.09.2016 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 354, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') registered in Women Police Station, District Gurgaon on the basis of compromise (Annexure P2) effected between the parties.

¶15

The parties were directed to appear before the trial Court on 07.04.2017 to get their statements recorded with regard to genuineness of compromise.

¶16

A report has been submitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, wherein it has been reported that statements of the petitioner and respondent No.2 (complainant) have been recorded and statements made by the parties in the Court reveal that they have voluntarily entered into a compromise with an intention to live in peace

¶17

and harmony.

¶18

Mohd. Yakub 2017.05.25 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CRM No.M-10094 of 2017 2

¶20

Counsel for the State assisted by counsel for the complainant has not disputed that the parties have arrived at a settlement with an intent to give burial to their differences.

¶21

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case

¶22

file.

¶23

Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code. Keeping in view authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in “Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and another”, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 543 and in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings are put to an end.

¶24

In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is allowed and FIR No.180 dated 08.09.2016 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 354, 506 read with Section 34 IPC registered in Women Police Station, District Gurgaon and proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.

¶25

23.05.2017 (REKHA MITTAL) yakub JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶26

Mohd. Yakub 2017.05.25 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Subhanu Vijh v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhanu Vijh 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

Surjit Kaur & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Jagjit Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Maya Ram Vs State of Haryana

Harmandeep Sharma Vs State of Punjab

Iklakh Vs State of Haryana