CRM-M-49261 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (127) Vineet Patwari State of Haryana and Anr. CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. dated 03.06.2025, of the IPC at Police Station Urban Estate, Rohtak, Haryana. 2. allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that, husband of the complainant and thereby the petitioner does not fall within the definition of a relative of prosecution under Se 3. that the FIR is at Any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case at this juncture would amount to interference in 49261-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Vineet Patwari Versus State of Haryana and Anr. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mr. Utkarsh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Paras Talwar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed for quashing FIR No. 0173 dated 03.06.2025, registered under Sections 323, 406, 498 of the IPC at Police Station Urban Estate, Rohtak, Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that, of the complainant, instigated the husband and thereby disturbing their matrimonial life. Counsel further submits that the petitioner does not fall within the definition of a relative of prosecution under Section 498-A IPC. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner he FIR is at its initial stage and the matter is Any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case at this juncture would interference in the investigative process -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-49261-2025 Date of Decision:- 04.09.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Paras Talwar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. he present petition has been filed for quashing FIR No. 0173 nder Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506, and 34 of the IPC at Police Station Urban Estate, Rohtak, Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that, he being a friend of the the husband against the complainant their matrimonial life. Counsel further submits that the petitioner does not fall within the definition of a relative for the purpose learned counsel for the petitioner. It is evident stage and the matter is still under investigation. Any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case at this juncture would the investigative process which is impermissible. - .09.2025 ……Petitioner s he present petition has been filed for quashing FIR No. 0173 06, and 34 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only being a friend of the against the complainant their matrimonial life. Counsel further submits that for the purpose t is evident under investigation. Any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case at this juncture would . MANJU 2025.09.09 16:21 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-49261 The petitioner Agency and take any 4. CRM-M-45191 appear before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this possibility of amicable settlement after impleading the complainant as a party-respondent. 5. stage, the same is dismissed 04.09.2025 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: 49261-2025 The petitioner always retains the right to appear before the Investigating Agency and take any such stand as he deems appropriate. It may be noted that vide order dated 01.09.2025 passe 45191-2025 the husband of the complainant was directed to appear before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this possibility of amicable settlement after impleading the complainant as a respondent. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed. Whether speaking/reasoned:-Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -2- right to appear before the Investigating he deems appropriate. It may be noted that vide order dated 01.09.2025 passed in 2025 the husband of the complainant was directed to appear before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court for exploring possibility of amicable settlement after impleading the complainant as a nding no merit in the present petition, at this (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE - right to appear before the Investigating d in 2025 the husband of the complainant was directed to for exploring possibility of amicable settlement after impleading the complainant as a at this MANJU 2025.09.09 16:21 I agree to specified portions of this document