CRM-M-3640-2025 ----1111---- 284 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3640-2025 Date of Decision:- 17.07.2025 YOGESH KUMAR BHARTI ALIAS RAHUL AND ANOTHER ....Petitioners Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM:---- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Bhim Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sulinder Kumar, DAG, Haryana. Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate for Mr. Rishi Pal Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.2/complaint. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. 1. Petitioners Yogesh Kumar Bharti @ Rahul and Rakesh Kumari have filed instant petition for quashing of FIR No.29 dated 23.01.2022 under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 34 IPC (Annexure P-1) registered at Police Station Women West, Gurugram and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. As per facts of the case, Neelam Tanwar filed complaint alleging that she got married with Yogesh Kumar Bharti @ Rahul on 15.03.2021. Her father-in-law expired on 14.05.2021 due to Corona. Her mother-in-law was torturing her and they kept her away from her son. Behaviour of her husband also changed towards her. Her mother-in-law started raising demand for a car and cash of Rs.5 lakhs. She was ill-treated in the matrimonial home. Her husband was having affair with her sister-in- SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.21 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-3640-2025 ----2222---- law Kammo and when she raised voice she was told not to disclose it to anybody. Her husband did not show interest in her. She was even locked inside the room. Complainant has levelled allegations against her husband having relationship with his sister-in-law. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered. 3. Petitioner filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 01.05.2025, petitioners and respondent No.2 were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements on the basis of compromise. Detailed report regarding compromise has been received from the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram dated 03.07.2025. Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded, where she confirmed the compromise with petitioners. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected without any pressure, coercion or undue influence and she has no objection regarding quashing of FIR. 4. Petitioners Yogesh Kumar Bharti @ Rahul and Rakesh Kumari also confirmed this fact in their joint statement. Statement of HC Poonam Kumari is also recorded who further confirmed that accused are not proclaimed offenders in this case. 5. Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram, it is clear that compromise has been effected between the parties amicably. They have mutually settled all their claims arisen from matrimonial dispute. Parties have decided to part their ways by filing joint SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.21 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-3640-2025 ----3333---- petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Matter has been settled in Rs.5,00,000/-. They will be able to live in peace and harmony. It will end the litigation between the parties. 6. Gainful reference can be made to the judgment of Larger Bench of Five Judges of this High Court cited in 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052 tilted as Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., tilted as Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., tilted as Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., tilted as Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., where it was explained that ‘there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the court to exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the section itself i.e. to prevent the abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice.’ 7. Therefore, by relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid judgment, no purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. Considering these facts, the petition filed by the petitioners is accepted and FIR No.29 dated 23.01.2022 under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Women West, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioners. 8. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well. (AMARJOT BHATTI) (AMARJOT BHATTI) (AMARJOT BHATTI) (AMARJOT BHATTI) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE 17.07.2025 snd Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.21 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document