IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.30197-M of 2006 Date of decision: 9th April, 2010 Anil Maheshwary and others … Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manish Deswal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.423 dated 10.11.2004 registered at Police Station Gharaunda, Tehsil and District Kaithal under Sections 498- A/406/506 IPC. A coordinate Bench of this Court, on April 24, 2007, had passed a very strong order regarding the conduct of the parties and had admitted the present petition. The said order be read as part of this order. During the pendency of the present petition for the last three years, a better sense has prevailed upon the parties. Counsel for the parties have also made efforts and have prevailed upon their respective parties to arrive at a compromise. Therefore, on April 7, 2010 the following order was passed: “Counsel for the parties have read the order dated April 24, 2007 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. Today, Criminal Misc. No.30197-M of 2006 counsel for the parties have used their good offices to resolve the bitter feud pending between the parties. Mr.Harish Gupta respondent No.2, father of Ms.Arpana Gupta respondent No.3, is present in Court. He has stated that they are least concerned about any amount, which the accused may pay, but however, to put an end to unpleasant relationship out of the grace, they will facilitate quashing of the FIR. However, the accused petitioner has come forward to pay another amount of Rs.30.00 lacs. Mr.Harish Gupta respondent No.2 has agreed to the request made by the counsel for the parties to accept the said amount on behalf of respondent No.3. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the amount, by way of demand draft, shall be tendered in this Court on 9th April, 2010. Mr.Akshay Bhan, Advocate, on instructions from Mr.Harish Gupta respondent No.2, has stated that after dissolution of the marriage, Ms.Arpana Gupta respondent No.3 has re-married and it will be difficult for her to appear in the Court. However, respondent No.2 shall produce an affidavit of respondent No.3 in this respect in the Court on the adjourned date. Counsel for the petitioners have no objection thereto. List on 9th April, 2010.” In pursuance of the said order, Mr.Harish Gupta respondent No.2 has placed on record an affidavit of Ms.Arpana Gupta respondent No.3. The same has been taken on record. Mr.Anil Maheshwary petitioner No.1 has presented a demand draft of Rs.30.00 lacs drawn on the name of Ms.Arpana Gupta respondent No.3. The same has been handed over to Mr.Harish Gupta respondent No.2 father of Ms.Arpana Gupta respondent No.3 and a copy thereof has been retained on the record as Annexure P-6. Respondent No.3 aggrieved wife, in all has received Rs.60.00 lacs towards the settlement of all of her disputes arising out of the FIR in the present case. The amount of Rs.60.00 lacs is towards Istri Dhan, expenses of the marriage and litigation, permanent alimony, past and 2 Criminal Misc. No.30197-M of 2006 future maintenance, if any. It is stated that due to the amicable settlement of the dispute, parties wish to part gracefully. It has been held by a Full Bench of this Court in ‘Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another’, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that if compromise has been effected between the parties, the Court should quash the FIR, if the offence is non-compoundable. It has also been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in ‘B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana’ 2003 (2) RCR (Criminal) 888 that if non-compoundable offence falls under Section 406, 498-A IPC, matter can be disposed of on the basis of compromise to promote peace, amity and cordial relations between the parties. Taking into consideration the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh’s case and B.S. Joshi’s case (supra), present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR, along with all subsequent proceedings, is hereby quashed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE April 9, 2010 rps 3