High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Manvir Singh & Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 8 August, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manvir Singh & Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 8 August, 2008
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                            CHANDIGARH.



                                           Criminal Misc.15108-M of 2008

                                 DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 8, 2008



MANVIR SINGH & ANR.                                  ....... PETITIONER(S)

                                 VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.                            .... RESPONDENT(S)



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA



PRESENT: Mr.RM Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
         Mr. Narender Sura, AAG, Haryana.
         Mr. Satinder Rana, Advocate, for respondent No.2.



AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of

Criminal Procedure, for quashing of FIR No.95 dated 13.4.2008 under

Sections 406, 420, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, DLF Phase-II,

Gurgaon (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that

there was a dispute with regard to a Ford Fiesta car, which was to be

purchased by respondent No.2-Kuldip Mewara. The terms were settled, the

car was purchased and the delivery of the car was given to the complainant.

There, however, was some misunderstanding with regard to the condition

of the vehicle, on account of which, the FIR (Annexure P-1) came to be

lodged. Now that the misunderstanding has been removed, respondent
Criminal Misc.15108-M of 2008 2

No.2-complainant does not want to prosecute the petitioners.

Respondent No.2-Kuldip Mewara, as identified by Shri S.K.

Rana, Advocate, is present in court. Respondent No.2 has endorsed the

factum of compromise and has prayed that the FIR and subsequent

proceedings be quashed. An affidavit in support of the contention of the

complainant has also been filed in court, which has been taken on record.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State states that in view

of the compromise having been effected between the parties, he has no

objection if the FIR and the proceedings are quashed.

Having regard to the nature of the offence that it arises out of

a commercial transaction and the fact that the dispute has been settled

between the parties, the petition is allowed. FIR (Annexure P-1) and

subsequent proceedings are quashed.

August 8, 2008                                           ( AJAI LAMBA )
Kang                                                             JUDGE