Xxxxxxxxxxxx vs Xxxxxxxxxxxx on 7 April, 2026

    0
    15
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Punjab-Haryana High Court

    Xxxxxxxxxxxx vs Xxxxxxxxxxxx on 7 April, 2026

                CRM-M-73013
                      73013-2025                                               -1-
    
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                             CHANDIGARH
    
                291
                                                                  CRM
                                                                  CRM-M-73013-2025
                                                                  Date of decision : 07.04.2026
                Arjun Bhargava
                                                                                      ...... Petitioner
                                                           V/S
                State of Haryana and Anr.
                                                                                     ..... Respondents
                                                                                           Respondent
    
                CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
    
                Present:           Mr. Ajay Redhu,, Advocate for petitioner.
    
                                   Mr. Ashwani Bhatia, AAG, Haryana.
    
                                   Mr. Sharandeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
                                         ****
    
                AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL)
    

    1. Petitioner – Arjun Bhargava has filed this petition under Section

    528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.0093
    0093

    SPONSORED

    dated 25.10.2024,
    25.10.2024 registered under Sections 406, 498
    498-A of IPC 1860 at Women

    Police Station,, Manesar District Gurugram (Annexure P-1)

    1) and all the

    subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner,, in the light of

    settlement agreement dated 15.10.2025 effected between the parties (Annexure

    P-2).

    2. As per facts of the case, complainant
    complainant/respondent
    /respondent No.2 Naina

    Tandon filed written complaint alleging that she got married with Arjun

    Bhargava on 12.12.2021 in Kanpur. Her husband was working with Flipkart in

    Gurugram. After marriage, they started living in Gurugram. Soon after

    marriage, the family members of her husband started maltreating her for

    bringing less dowry. Attitude of her husband also changed towards her. The
    SUNIL DEVI
    2026.04.11 12:54
    I attest to the accuracy and
    integrity of this document
    CRM-M-73013
    73013-2025 -2-

    complainant has narrated various incidents which took place in the matrimonial

    home. During this period she conceived and
    and gave birth to a child. The

    behaviour of her husband was strange. He used to scream and shouted at her.

    There was no change in the behaviour of her husband. On account of

    continuous maltreatment in the matrimonial home, she filed the complaint on

    the basis of which present FIR has been registered.

    3. Petitioner filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the

    basis of compromise. Vide order dated 24.12.2025
    24.12.2025, petitioner Arjun Bhargava

    and respondent No.2 Naina Tandon were directed to appear bbefore
    efore 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 Ist Class, Gurugram dated 27.01.2026.. Statement of

    respondent No.2 has been recorded where she confirmed the compromise with

    petitioner.. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected voluntarily,

    without any coercion or undue influence and she has no objection regarding

    quashing of FIR.

    R.

    4. Petitioner Arjun Bhargava also confirmed this fact in his
    Petitioner-

    statement. Statement of L/HC Mamta is also recorded who confirmed that

    petitioner is not involved or declared as proclaimed offender in any other

    criminal case. He further confirmed that present
    present FIR was registered against

    three accused namely Arjun Bhargava, Sanjay Bhargava and Nalini Bhargava.

    Sanjay Bhargava and Nalini Bhargava were not chargesheeted in the final

    report.

    5. Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

    Gurugram it is clear that the compromise has been effected between the parties

    SUNIL DEVI
    2026.04.11 12:54
    I attest to the accuracy and
    integrity of this document
    CRM-M-73013
    73013-2025 -3-

    without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, which is acceptable to both

    the parties. They have mutually settled all their claims arisen from matrimonial

    dispute. They have
    have decided to part ways by filing joint petition under Section

    13-B
    B
    of Hindu Marriage Act. Matter has been settled in Rs.

    Rs.18,00,000/-..

    Thereafter, they will be able to live independently in peace and harmony. It will

    end the litigation started between them.

    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 titled

    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
    the section itself i.e. to prevent 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
    g these facts, the petition filed by the petitioner is accepted and FIR

    No.0093 dated 25.10.2024, registered under Sections 406, 498
    498-A
    A
    of IPC 1860

    at Women Police Station, Manesar District Gurugram (Annexure P
    P-1) and all

    subsequent proceedings arisen therefrom
    there are quashed qua petitioner Arjun

    Bhargava.

    (AMARJOT BHATTI )
    JUDGE
    07.04.2026.

    Sunil Devi
    Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
    Whether Reportable: Yes/No

    SUNIL DEVI
    2026.04.11 12:54
    I attest to the accuracy and
    integrity of this document



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here