Allowed

Sheikh Mohammad Habib and Another v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Sept 2024CRM-M/36296/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS to quash an FIR based on a genuine compromise deed dated 28.04.2023. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court held no useful purpose served in keeping proceedings pending the settlement.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.378 dated 30.08.2020 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Sheikh Mohammad Habib and Another Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-36296-2024 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

250

¶5

CRM-M-36296-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 06.09.2024

��

....Petitioner(s)

Versus

��

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY

¶12

Present : Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG Haryana.

¶14

�� !��"�

¶15

¶16

SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL)

¶17

By way of present petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, petitioners seek quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/settlement dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-2) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows:

¶18

FIR No.	Dated	Sections	Police Station
378	30.08.2020	406 and 420 IPC; (467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC added later on)	Sector 5, Gurugram

¶19

SANDAL SHARMA 2024.09.09 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶20

CRM-M-36296-2024 (O&M)

¶21

-2-

¶22

With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The learned #��$�$�%��&$��$��%��'��&��( vide report dated 22.08.2024 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. The petitioners have also deposited the cost of Rs.20,000/- in compliance to the order dated 31.07.2024.

¶23

Respondent No.2 is represented by his counsel and does not oppose the compromise.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned #��$�$�%��&$�� $��%��, Gurugram and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “ Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another ”, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and “ Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another ”, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons.

¶25

5 . In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.378 dated 30.08.2020 under Sections 406 and 420 IPC; (467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sector 5,

¶26

SANDAL SHARMA 2024.09.09 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶27

CRM-M-36296-2024 (O&M) -3-

¶28

Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioners.

¶29

(SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE

¶30

06.09.2024

¶31

S.Sharma(syr)

¶32

i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶33

SANDAL SHARMA 2024.09.09 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Sheikh Mohammad Habib and Another v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheikh Mohammad Habib and Another 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

Bharat Chugh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Surender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Amanjot Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Malkit Singh Alias Tunda Vs State of Punjab

Pinki and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Paramjit Singh Alias Pamma Alias Paramjit Vs State of Punjab