Quashed

Santosh Kumari v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Dec 2012CRM-M/2793/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge quashed an FIR registered against the petitioner upon the registration of a compromise deed between the parties, relying on Supreme Court and Full Bench precedents holding that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging litigation in resolution finances.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 190 dated 04.06.2008 and all consequential proceedings qua petitioner.

Santosh Kumari Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-2793 of 2009 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-2793 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 13.12.2012

Santosh Kumari

....Petitioners

versus

State of Punjab and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present: Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner

¶12

Mr. P.S. Bajwa, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶13

Mr. S.S. Kharia, Advocate for respondent the complainant.

¶14

¶15

RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)

¶16

Quashing of FIR No. 190 dated 04.06.2008 under Sections 353, 186, 294, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station City Faridkot, Distt. District Faridkot (Annexure P-1) is sought on the basis of compromise dated 19.03.2012 (Annexure A-4).

¶17

F.I.R has been registered on the statement made by Devender Kumar-complainant, who is working in Police Department as Gunman with a judicial officer. On the date of incident, Santosh Kumari wife of Lakhi Ram came and torn the uniform of the complainant and H.C. Paramjit Singh Tatta got him released from her hands and she started threatening and hurling filthy abuses. In this background, the FIR was got registered.

¶18

After presentation of the challan, at the stage of recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the parties have now compromised the matter.

¶19

Now, the matter has been resolved between the parties, vide

¶20

-2-

¶21

Crl. Misc. No. M-2793 of 2009 (O&M)

¶22

compromise dated 19.03.2012 (Annexure A-4).

¶23

On notice, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has put in appearance and has tendered the affidavit dated 16.10.2012 of respondent No. 2. As per affidavit, F.I.R has been registered against the petitioner by the complainant. Now he has entered into compromise with accused Santosh Kumari does not want to pursue the above noted case against the accused.

¶24

Consequently, in view of the affidavit dated 16.10.2012 and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 , 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 , no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

¶25

Accordingly, FIR No. 190 dated 04.06.2008 under Sections 353, 186, 294, 506 and 323 IPC , registered at Police Station City Faridkot, Distt. Faridkot is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner.

¶26

The petition stands disposed of.

¶27

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

¶28

13.12.2012 sarita

Santosh Kumari v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumari v. State of Punjab and 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

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Poonam Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Varinder Bhatia and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kiran Ghia Vs Surinder Kumar Mittal and Ors.

Jasbir Singh Vs Assistant Xen and Ors.

Mohan Lal Vs Ranbir Kumar