PANKAJ NAGPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short `Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of FIR No. 59 dated 22.1.2005 registered under Sections 323/506 IPC at Police Station NIT District Faridabad (Annexure P1) and all further proceedings arising there from and for permission of compounding of all offence on the basis of compromise.

(2.) Notice of the petition was issued to the respondents. Respondent No.2,however, did not put in appearance despite service. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the present case, the complaint had been filed by mother of Payal, who is divorced wife of petitioner No.1-Pankaj Nagpal. A matrimonial dispute arose between petitioner No.1-Pankaj Nagpal and his wife Payal. Payal, Crl.Misc.No.M-40600 of 2007 2 wife of petitioner No.1 lodged FIR No. 1027 dated 13.12.2004 under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC. The said FIR was quashed by this Court vide order dated 17.8.2007 on the basis of compromise effected between the parties. Pankaj Nagpal and Payal got a decree of divorce dated 14.3.2007 on the basis of mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955.

(3.) Learned State counsel has not controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. The petitioners have sought quashing of FIR in question on the basis of a compromise effected between the parties. In normal circumstances, the FIR on the basis of a compromise is quashed in case , the respondent/complainant appears and admits the factum of compromise. Facts of the present case are peculiar. Respondent No.2 has not appeared in this Court despite service. The allegations levelled in the FIR in question are that the respondent as well as her daughter were threatened by the petitioners that in case they did not withdraw FIR No.1027 dated 13.12.2004 under Sections 498-A, 406/34 IPC, they would be taught a lesson. FIR No.1027 dated 13.12.2004 has however, been quashed by this Court vide order dated 17.8.2007 in Criminal Misc., No. 40597-M of 2007 and the following order was passed:-