Allowed

Jasmeet Singh Gill & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2013CRM-M/11056/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR registered against a husband, his parents, and brother for offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, and 506 IPC. The Chief Judicial Magistrate exercised inherent powers based on a matrimonial compromise and reconciliation, directing the quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 181 dated 01.09.2012 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

Jasmeet Singh Gill & Ors. Vs State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-11056 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-11056 of 2013

¶5

Date of Decision : May 24, 2013

¶6

Jasmeet Singh Gill and others

¶7

.... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Haryana and another .... Respondents

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶11

¶12

Present : Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Sidharth Sarup, DAG, Haryana for respondent no. 1.

¶14

Mr. Gurmit Singh, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

¶15

¶16

L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :

¶17

Accused Jasmeet Singh Gill, his parents and brother have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No.181 dated 01.09.2012 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short – IPC),

¶18

registered at Police Station Palam Vihar, District Gurgaon, in view of compromise effected with respondent no. 2 – complainant, who has

¶19

¶20

Crl. Misc. No. M-11056 of 2013

¶21

furnished affidavit (Annexure P-2) regarding the compromise.

¶22

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Petitioner no. 1 – husband and respondent no. 2 – wife are said to be present in person in the Court.

¶23

Counsel for respondent no.2 – complainant, on instructions from respondent no.2, stated that parties have effected compromise, for which respondent no. 2 has furnished affidavit (Annexure P-2), and therefore, respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the impugned FIR is quashed.

¶24

Counsel for the parties also stated, on instructions, that in view of settlement, petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 are residing together as husband and wife peacefully.

¶25

In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2007

¶26

(3) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana) 2225 .

¶27

In the instant case, impugned FIR is result of matrimonial dispute between petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2. Fortunately, they have reconciled and have started residing together as husband and wife. It is, therefore, a fit case in which FIR should be quashed so that the parties

¶28

Crl. Misc. No. M-11056 of 2013

¶29

¶30

may continue to live happily as husband and wife.

¶31

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR

¶32

Annexure P-1 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom.

May 24, 2013

monika

( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE

Jasmeet Singh Gill & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasmeet Singh Gill & Ors. v. State of Haryana & 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

M/S Pacific Educational Academy Vs Amit Kapoor

Babbi Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ram Karan @ Guddi and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sushil Dabra and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Chandan Dabra and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Avtar Singh Vs State of Pb and Anr.