Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR alleging abduction of Meenu under Section 366 IPC, grounded on a compromise between parties where the accused stated it was a voluntary parting.
FIR No.5 dated 6.1.2009 along with all consequential proceedings registered under Section 366 IPC were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M 3237 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.2.2009
Kamaldeep @ Kamal
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARBANS LAL
Present: Mr.GS Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.Amit Kaushik, AAG, Haryana
Mr.JS Lalli, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
Harbans Lal, J.(Oral)
This petition has been moved by Kamaldeep @ Kamal under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.5 dated 6.1.2009, registered under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Kalanwali and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground of compromise.
The grounds pleaded are that the parties have compromised the matter with the intervention of the respectables, therefore, no useful purpose would be served if the proceedings are allowed to continue. Complainant Surinder Kumar has sworn an affidavit (Annexure P-3), wherein he has stated that his sister Meenu left the house with her own free will and she has not been abducted by anybody. Now she has returned to house of her own. He as well as his sister has no objection, if the FIR in question is quashed. Meenu has sworn an affidavit (Annexure P-2), wherein she has
stated that
CRM No.M 3237 of 2009 (O&M) -2-
she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. She has also made a statement in the court as under:
“I am lecturer by profession. I have seen the affidavit Annexure P-2. It bears my signatures. This affidavit was got attested by me from the Notary at Sirsa on 14.1.2009. The solemn affirmations made in this affidavit are true and correct. This affidavit has not been give by me under any pressure, threat, inducement or promise from anybody.”
Mr.JS Lalli, Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 has also conceded this fact.
In view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in
re: Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another
2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052, the Court is competent to quash the proceedings on the basis of compromise. Sequelly, this petition is accepted and FIR No.5 dated 6.1.2009, registered under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Kalanwali and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
(Harbans Lal) Judge
February 18, 2009 gsv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether High Court proceedings under Section 482 CrPC can be quashed on the ground of compromise in a Section 366 IPC case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and anotherReferred¶22
Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports (Crl.) 1052
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kamaldeep @ Kamal
State of Haryana
Harbans Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
