Quashed

Narender and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Mar 2012CRM-M/10032/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed FIR No.180 regarding criminal charges preceded by succession dispute. Court found a valid compromise affidavit and death of a respondent, rendering continuation of proceedings unnecessary. Relied on Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.180 dated 21.7.2009 registered at Police Station Tauru and consequential proceedings are quashed.

Narender and Anr. Vs State of Haryana… — Succession and Inheritance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.M-10032 of 2010

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.M-10032 of 2010 Date of decision:2.3.2012

Narender and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present: Mr.P.R.Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Kartar Singh, DAG, Haryana.

¶13

Mr.Manoj Tanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶14

Mr.Surinder Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶15

RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)

¶16

Quashing of FIR No.180 dated 21.7.2009 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Tauru District Mewat and the proceedings consequential thereto are sought on the basis of affidavit dated 9.3.2010 (Annexure P-7).

¶17

As per the allegations in the FIR, petitioner No.1, who is real brother of respondent No.3, has sold some land after the death of his mother and has usurped the share of respondent No.3.

¶18

During the pendency of the investigation, parties have entered into compromise and an affidavit has been given respondent No.3 (Annexure P-7), in which it has been stated that on 18.9.2001

¶19

CRM No.M-10032 of 2010

¶20

¶21

her mother got registered a Will in favour of her brother Narender before Sub-Registrar, Dharuhera. She has no objection to the Will. Her mother expired on 9.11.2011 and thereafter her brother had got recorded his name in the revenue record in place of her mother. She has no objection to the same and the Will bearing No.42/3 dated 18.9.2011 is true and correct.

¶22

As per order dated 12.8.2010, the counsel for respondent No.3 placed on record affidavit of respondent No.3 to the same effect.

¶23

Counsel for respondent No.2 has informed the Court that respondent No.2 has since died.

¶24

Keeping in view the averments made in the affidavit dated 12.8.2010 and respondent No.2 is no more, this Court is of the view that n o useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise.

¶25

Consequently, in view of the above circumstances and in view of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008 (4) S.C.C. 582 and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, FIR No.180 dated 21.7.2009 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Tauru District Mewat and the proceedings consequential thereto are quashed qua petitioners.

¶26

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

¶27

2.3.2012 mks

Narender and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narender and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

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

Subhash Chand Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jasvir Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Prem Chand Gupta Vs State of Haryana

Jacob Masih and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Dilbag Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Jai Singh Vs State of Haryana