Allowed

Sourabh Kumar Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Oct 2017CRM-M/17117/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC for quashing an FIR registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 34 IPC. The court held that since the matrimonial dispute was amicably settled with a divorce petition filed, continuing prosecution was futile.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 144 dated 16.03.2015 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

Sourabh Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-17117-2017 Date of decision: 24.10.2017

¶3

Sourabh Kumar Singh and others

¶4

...Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Haryana and another

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶10

Present:Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. P. P. Chahar, DAG, Haryana.

¶12

JAISHREE THAKUR, J.(ORAL)

¶13

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 144 dated 16.03.2015, under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 7, Faridabad, District Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶14

In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner No.1 got married with respondent No.1 on 03.07.2014 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. A dispute arose between them due to their different temperaments. Above referred FIR was got registered by respondent No.2 against petitioner No.1 her husband, and petitioners No.2 & 3 her father-inlaw and mother-in-law respectively. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and a divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act

¶15

Satyawan 2017.10.27 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶16

CRM-M-17117-2017

¶17

-2-

¶18

has been filed (annexure P-2), apart from other terms and conditions detailed therein.

¶19

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report in has been received from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same appears to be genuine one.

¶20

Mr. P.P. Chahar, DAG, Haryana, on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, they would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and gone through the record.

¶22

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

¶23

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble

¶24

Satyawan 2017.10.27 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶25

CRM-M-17117-2017

¶26

-3-

¶27

Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543 , this petition is allowed and FIR No. 144 dated 16.03.2015, under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 7, Faridabad, District Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua the petitioners.

¶28

The petition stands disposed of.

¶29

24.10.2017 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No

¶30

Satyawan 2017.10.27 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Sourabh Kumar Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sourabh Kumar Singh and Ors. 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

Prime Rangra and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Tushar Verma & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Parvinder Kumar @ Kashyap Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Aman Sarwan Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Satywan Vs State of Haryana