Allowed

Gian Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2012CRM-M/11164/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge oral order allowed the petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR under Sections 406/498-A IPC based on a compromise settlement between the spouses, while reserving the complainant's right to revive proceedings if the settlement terms are violated.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; the FIR No.268 under Sections 406/498-A IPC and all consequential proceedings are hereby quashed qua the present petitioners.

Gian Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.M- 11164 of 2012 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No.M-11164 of 2012 (O&M)

¶4

Date of decision : 05.10.2012

¶5

Gian Singh and others

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶11

Present: Ms. Monika Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Mehardeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. K.S. Boparai, Advocate for the complainant.

¶14

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶15

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing of FIR No.268 dated 19.07.2010, under Sections 406/498-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC') registered at Police Station Tripri Town, District Patiala, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties (Annexure P-1).

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioners as well as for private respondent jointly submit that since the parties have arrived at an outof-Court settlement by way of compromise, the impugned FIR along

¶17

CRM No.M- 11164 of 2012 -2-

¶18

with the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are liable to be quashed.

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

Petitioner No.1-Gian Singh and respondent No.2-

¶21

complainant, Gurvinder Kaur, who are duly identified by their respective counsel, are present in person. A short affidavit of the complainant-respondent No.2, has been filed in the Court, which is taken on record. Therefore, no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings alive.

¶22

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, this petition is allowed and FIR No.268 dated 19.07.2010, under Sections 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Tripri Town, District Patiala, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed, qua the present petitioners.

¶23

However, in case, the terms and conditions of the agreement are violated, the respondent-complainant shall be at liberty to revive the petition.

¶24

05.10.2012 atulsethi

¶25

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

Gian Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gian Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

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

Amandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Daljit Singh Alias Jeeta Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gurmeet Kaur Alias Meeto Vs State of Punjab

Ravinder Kumar Vs Tripta and Others

Poonam Rani Vs State of Punjab

Kala @ Charkanda and Anr. Vs State of Punjab