Allowed

Sunil Kumar and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Sept 2018CRM-M/19581/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under 498-A IPC and related sections based on a voluntary compromise. The High Court, noting a trainee court report on voluntary compromise and innocence of another named individual, allowed the petition and quashed proceedings against the petitioners while parties remained bound by the compromise.

What did the court decide?

The instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings are quashed qua the petitioners.

Sunil Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Haryana… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-19581 of 2018

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-19581 of 2018 Date of Decision: 27.9.2018

¶5

Sunil Kumar and another

¶6

......Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

¶10

Present: Mr. Virender Soni, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Arun Kumar, AAG, Haryana

¶12

None for respondent No. 2.

¶13

¶14

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J (ORAL)

¶15

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 613 dated 22.9.2015 registered under Sections 328, 315, 498-A, 34, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Sadar Rohtak, District Rohtak (Annexure P-1) and all the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3) arrived at between the parties.

¶16

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 copy of the statements of the parties and the compromise.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioners along with Savita were named in the FIR but Savita was found innocent and challan was presented against the petitioners and respondent

¶18

GURPREET SINGH 2018.09.28 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-19581 of 2018

¶20

-2-

¶21

No. 2 is the only aggrieved person in this FIR.

¶22

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR pending.

¶23

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.

¶24

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

¶25

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE

¶26

September 27, 2018 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No

¶27

GURPREET SINGH 2018.09.28 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

Sunil Kumar and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar and Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baldev Raj Vs Santosh Kumari @ Santosh Rani

Simarjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Gaurav and Others Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jasvir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Baljit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Joginder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.