Allowed

Malkiat Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Oct 2014CRM-M/21005/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR and consequential proceedings in a matrimonial dispute. The court found a genuine compromise between the spouses and observed that continuing the trial would be an abuse of process of law with bleak prospects of conviction.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 88 dated 14.7.2012 under Sections 120-B, 406 and 498-A IPC and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Malkiat Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

CRM-M-21005-2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-21005-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 7, 2014

¶5

Malkiat Kaur and another

¶6

…Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

…Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr. Ravish Bansal, Advocate, for Mr. Ashok Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Mikhail Kad, AAG, Punjab, for respondent No. 1.

¶13

Mr. Achin Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

¶14

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J. (Oral)

¶15

The present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Malkiat Kaur wife of Gurbax Singh and Kulwant Singh Gill @ Rajwinder Singh son of Gurbax Singh, both residents of Mansoorwal Kala, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, presently residing at 3581, North Parkway Drive, APT No. 125, Fresno, CA 93722 (USA), for quashing of FIR No. 88, dated 14.7.2012 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 120-B, 406 and 498-A, IPC, registered at Police Station, Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2). 2. Vide order dated 21.1.2014, the affected parties were

¶16

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.10.13 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶17

CRM-M-21005-2013 (O&M) 2

¶18

directed to appear on 24.2.2014 before the learned Trial Court, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The said Court was directed to ensure that the compromise was voluntary and without any threat or coercion and to send the report about the genuineness of the compromise along with original statements of parties and the terms of the written compromise to this Court before the adjourned date.

¶19

In compliance thereof, the complainant-respondent No. 2, Gurpreet Kaur, did appear before the learned Court below and got recorded her statement with regard to the compromise. Since the petitioners, Malkiat Kaur and Kulwant Singh Gill @ Rajwinder Singh, were residing in the foreign country, therefore, they could not appear before the learned Trial Court on 24.2.2014. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.5.214 this Court had directed the petitioners to appear through their special attorney before the learned Trial Court and to make statement with regard to the compromise. In compliance thereof Gurbhej Singh son of Gurcharan Singh, resident of village Sheikhwan, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, attorney of the petitioners, did appear before the learned Court below on 25.7.2014 and got recorded his statement with regard to the compromise. The reports dated10.3.2014 and 30.8.2014 from the learned Trial Court have also been received stating that the compromise between the private parties was genuine one.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

¶21

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.10.13 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶22

CRM-M-21005-2013 (O&M) 3

¶23

present criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute and due to intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, husband-petitioner No. 2, Kulwant Singh Gill @ Rajwinder Singh, as well as complainant/wife-respondent No. 2, Gurpreet Kaur, have decided to part company with each other; the terms and conditions of the compromise have already been materialized; and that in view of the prevailing circumstances the pendency of the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, would be sheer abuse of the process of law. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court delivered in the matter of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 888.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No. 2 are ad idem that the private parties have sorted out their dispute and effected a compromise. They are also unanimous that pendency of the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings arising therefrom would be abuse of the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence of the petitioners are bleak.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

¶26

The present criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute. Both the private factions have sorted out

¶27

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.10.13 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶28

CRM-M-21005-2013 (O&M)

¶29

¶30

their dispute and effected a compromise. Copies of the respective statements along with the reports of the learned Trial Court have been received. Learned counsel for the private parties are in unison that the matter has been resolved amicably. Learned counsel for the State has also gone through the copies of the statements and the reports received from the learned Court below and has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings arising out of the matrimonial dispute are quashed on the basis of the compromise. Since respondent No. 2-complainant has sorted out all her disputes and effected a compromise with the petitioners, therefore, continuation of the proceedings emanating from the impugned FIR, would be a sheer abuse of the process of law. The chances of ultimate conviction and sentence of the petitioners-accused are also bleak.

¶31

In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the ratio of the judgment delivered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of B.S. Joshi (supra) , this petition is accepted and FIR No. 88, dated 14.7.2012 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 120-B, 406 and 498-A, IPC, registered at Police Station, Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur, and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶32

October 7, 2014 Pkapoor

¶33

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE

¶34

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2014.10.13 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Malkiat Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malkiat Kaur and Anr. 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

Tejbir Singh Ahlwat Vs P.K. Gupta IAS and Anr.

Gurmeet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Jasvir Isngh & Anr. Vs Baljinder Singh

Ali Mohmmad & Ors. Vs Karim Bax

Gurinder Singh & Anr. Vs Batra Theatre

Tahir Hussain Vs State of Haryana and Ors.