Allowed

Sachin Sarswat v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Oct 2021CRM-M/13439/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of an FIR registered under Section 498-A IPC. The Court held that the dispute was amicably settled via a compromise without coercion, making further prosecution futile, and relied on Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.140 dated 16.10.2018 registered under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A IPC and all subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Sachin Sarswat Vs State of Haryana and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M No.13439 of 2021

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.13439 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:14.10.2021 (Heard through VC)

Sachin Sarswat

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

¶11

Present:Mr. Nipun Vashist, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

Ms. Manpreet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

-.-

¶15

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL)

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.140 dated 16.10.2018 registered under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A Indian Penal Code at Police Station Women, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the settlement dated 03.02.2021 (Annexure P- 2 ).

¶17

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant on the allegations that the accused-petitioner harassed her on account of demand of dowry. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

¶18

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa

¶19

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.10.14 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

-2-

¶21

CRM-M No.13439 of 2021

¶22

Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Gurugram stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

¶23

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainantrespondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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 Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.140 dated

¶27

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.10.14 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

-3-

¶29

CRM-M No.13439 of 2021

¶30

16.10.2018 registered under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A Indian Penal Code at Police Station Women, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioner.

¶31

October 14, 2021 (JAISHREE THAKUR) Pankaj* JUDGE

¶32

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶33

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.10.14 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sachin Sarswat v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Sarswat v. State of Haryana and Another

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

Yogesh Bhatia Vs State of Punjab and Another

Saurabh Garg and Another Vs State of Haryana and Another

Shahid @ Shahid Ahmed and Ors. Vs Statae of Punjab and Ors.

Raja Vs State of Punjab and Another

Mohanlal Vs State of Haryana and Another

Parveen Verma Vs State of Punjab and Others