Manju Chadha and Another and Yashpal Bhasin vs State of Haryana and Another

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—This Court, on 1.4.2010, has passed the following order:

Learned Counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to order dated 22.2.2010 wherein it was recorded that the compromise between the parties is likely to be materialized very shortly.

Mr. Sibal has stated that the talks between the parties could not fructify as the petitioners have made an offer of Rs. 6,00,000/- towards permanent alimony and settlement of all disputes. But the complainant party had put forward the proposal of Rs. 7,00,000/-.

Today, Sunil Malik, brother of Renu Bala, respondent No. 2, has come present in this Court.

During the course of arguments, Mr. Sibal and Mr. Ahluwalia (counsel for respondent No. 2) have agreed and a broad consensus has been arrived that payment of Rs. 6,50,000/- will decide all the disputes pending between the parties. This offer has been very graciously accepted by Sunil Malik, brother of Renu Bala, respondent No. 2, who is also an Advocate. It is also agreed that the statements of parties, to this effect, can be recorded on 6.4.2010.

List on 6.4.2010.

The parties shall remain present in this Court on the date fixed.

In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the parties are present today in Court. Their statements have been recorded separately and the same be read as a part of this order.

Today, petitioner Yashpal Bhasin has handed over two demand drafts, amounting to Rs. 4,40,000/- and Rs. 2,10,000/-, to his wife Renu Bala, respondent No. 2, for encashment. The photocopies thereof are placed on record as Mark "A" and Mark "B", respectively.

Criminal Misc. No. 3703-M of 2006 has been preferred by petitioners Manju Chadha wife of Naresh Chadha and Pawan Kapoor wife of M.L. Kapoor, whereas Yashpal Bhasin has preferred Criminal Misc. No. 52028-M of 2007. In both the petitions, they have prayed for quashing of FIR No. 157 dated 28.5.2004, registered at Police Station Ambala Cantt. under Sections 406, 498A, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. Thus, they are being decided together.

Since the parties have decided to bury their differences and have made a prayer for quashing of the impugned FIR, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served in continuation of the same and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

It has been held by a Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that if compromise has been effected between the parties, the Court should quash the FIR, even 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 u/s 406, 498A 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 and B.S. Joshi�s cases (supra), present FIR, along with all subsequent proceedings, is quashed.

As stated by the parties, the proceedings, initiated by the aggrieved wife, u/s 125 Cr.P.C. shall also stand withdrawn.

With these observations, both the petitions are disposed of.