Allowed

Balwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2006CRM/33149/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous petition sought quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 307, 323, 498-A, 406, 506, and 120-B IPC. The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the FIR and subsequent proceedings due to an amicable settlement and bona fide compromise between the husband, wife, and family members.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.6 dated 3.1.2004 registered under Sections 307/323/498-A/406/506 and 120-B IPC and all subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Balwinder Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2006)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl.Misc.No. 33149-M of 2006

¶3

DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 4, 2006

¶4

Balwinder Singh and others

...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

¶10

Present: Mr.J.S.Verka , Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.N.S.Gill, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIR No.6 dated 3.1.2004 registered under Sections 307/323/498-A/406/506 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

¶12

The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement made by petitioner No.2 against her husband and his other family members.

¶13

During the pendency of this petition, parties have amicably settled their dispute. Petitioner No.1, husband of the complainant, appeared in the court today along with his counsel and has made the following statement:

¶14

“My marriage was performed with Sukhraj Kaur on 16.6.1993. From the said marriage, two issues were born. Subsequently when I was serving in the Indian Air Force and when my wife was living with my father in the village, some

¶15

Crl.Misc.No. 33149-M of 2006 -2-

¶16

harassment was caused to my wife. On that account, FIR No.6 dated 3.1.2004 under Sections 307, 323, 498-A, 406, 506 and 120-B IPC was registered at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar, was lodged by my wife against me and my family members. Now we have amicably settled our disputes and I have assured my wife that I will neither harass her nor permit any member of my family to harass her. Today, I give undertaking to the Court that in future I will not harass my wife or permit any member of my family to harass her.”

¶17

Petitioner No.2/complainant also appeared in the court today

¶18

along with her counsel and has made the following statement:-

¶19

“I have heard the statement of my husband. Earlier due to some misunderstanding I got registered FIR No.6 dated 3.1.2004 under Sections 307, 323, 498-A, 406, 506 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar against my husband and his other family members. Now we have amicably settled our disputes and at present I am living happily with my husband and children. They assured me that in future that will not harass me and I have no objection if the aforesaid FIR lodged by me is quashed.”

¶20

After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I

¶21

am of the opinion that since with the intervention of relatives and respectables, the parties have amicably settled their disputes and now petitioner No.2 is living happily with her husband and children, therefore, in view of the compromise, no useful purpose will be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings in the instant FIR and it will be futile because petitioner No.2-complainant is not going to support the prosecution case. I am satisfied that the settlement arrived at between the parties is bona fide. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid statements made by petitioners No.1 and 2, the fact that the parties have compromised the matter and the law laid down by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.,

¶22

Crl.Misc.No. 33149-M of 2006

¶23

-3-

¶24

JT 2003 (3) SC 277, FIR No.6 dated 3.1.2004 registered under Sections 307/323/498-A/406/506 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar,

¶25

and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

¶26

Petition stands allowed accordingly.

¶27

December 4, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE

Balwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karambir Vs Hry. State and Ors.

Anshuman Ahluwalia and Ors. Vs State of U T and Anr.

Rajbir Singh Gulia Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jai Bhagwan and Anr. Vs State of Hry and Ors.

Sevak Vs State of Hry.

Harmohan Singh Vs Jagdev Singh & Ors.