CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----17039 17039 17039 17039----2025 2025 2025 2025 ----1111---- 254 254 254 254 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----17039 17039 17039 17039----2025 2025 2025 2025 Date of Decision:- 08.07.2025 DHEERAJ YADAV DHEERAJ YADAV DHEERAJ YADAV DHEERAJ YADAV ....Petitioner 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. Kuldeep, Advocate for Mr. Pawan Singh Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sulinder Kumar, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Anmol Jindal, Advocate for respondent No.2. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. AMARJOT BHATTI, J. 1. Petitioner has filed instant petition for quashing of FIR No.25 dated 03.04.2020, under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A and 506 of IPC registered at Women Police Station, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/MOU dated 27.02.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. Facts of the case are, Anju Yadav filed written complaint against her husband Dheeraj Yadav and other members of in-laws family. She alleged that her marriage was solemnized with Dheeraj Yadav on 25.11.2007. Her mother and family members had spent approximately Rs.20/22 lakhs on her marriage. She was given gold and silver jewellery and indica car. Her father had expired during her childhood and her brother got missing in 2001. Her mother had performed her marriage with great hardship. Her in-laws were unhappy with the dowry articles. She was SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.11 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----17039 17039 17039 17039----2025 2025 2025 2025 ----2222---- taunted and maltreated in the matrimonial home. During this period, she gave birth to a girl child on 27.03.2009. She tolerated the atrocities of accused persons. Thereafter, she gave birth to a son who was mentally weak since his birth. She was always under pressure. She was compelled to transfer the property inherited by her from her father. She has narrated various incident of cruelty which took place in the matrimonial home. She also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Finally she started living in her parental house along with her children. Thereafter, complaint was filed. 3. Petitioner filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 28.03.2025, petitioner 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 19.05.2025. Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded, where she confirmed the compromise with petitioner. 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. Petitioner – Dheeraj Yadav also confirmed this fact in his statement. Statement of L/HC Pushpa is also recorded who further confirmed that accused is not proclaimed offender 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 SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.11 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----17039 17039 17039 17039----2025 2025 2025 2025 ----3333---- matrimonial dispute. They will be able to live in peace and harmony. Parties have decided to part their ways. No purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. 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 petitioner is accepted and FIR No.25 dated 03.04.2020 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A and 506 of IPC registered at Women Police Station, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioner. 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 08.07.2025 snd Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No SANDEEP KUMAR 2025.07.11 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document