NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of FIR No.44 dated 16.2.2012, under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC as well as under Section 2(c) & 4 of Prize Chit & Money Circulation Schemes (Banking) Act, 1978, registered at Police Station SGM Nagar, Faridabad (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit.

(2.) On March 04, 2016, this Court had adjourned the case for today and directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/ trial Court on 18.3.2016 or any other date convenient to the Court to get the statements recorded on the plea of the petitioner that the parties could not appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded in terms of order dated 8.12.2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that despite execution of affidavit dated 10.11.2012, the complainant is not coming forward to get his statement recorded in support of the said affidavit. Relevant para Nos.1 to 4 of the affidavit reads as under :-

(3.) He further states that in support of the affidavit, respondent No.2-complainant has made a statement before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad on 10.11.2012 reiterating the fact that he has compromised the matter with the petitioner and has no objection if the petitioner is released on bail. He further argued that despite there being a direction by this Court to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court to get their statements recorded in the light of affidavit dated 10.11.2012, the respondent No.2-complainant is not coming forward to get his statement recorded. Efforts were made by the petitioner to bring the complainant Dilip Kumar Upadhaya before the trial Court for making his statement regarding the compromise but he has not turned up. Therefore, statement of the complainant could not be recorded pursuant to orders dated 08.12.2015 and 4.3.2016.