Allowed

Naveen Kaplaysh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Feb 2014CRM-M/26916/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge permitted the quashing of an FIR under Section 498-A IPC based on a voluntary compromise reached between the accused and the complainant, relying on inherent powers despite the offence being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

The impugned First Information Report (F.I.R) No. 25 dated 15.02.2010 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

Naveen Kaplaysh and Ors. Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-26916 of 2012 (O&M)

¶3

Date of decision: February 05, 2014

¶4

Naveen Kaplaysh (Kaplesh) and others

¶5

.. Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Punjab and another

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta

¶10

Present: Mr. Harminderjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Arshdeep S. Kler, AAG, Punjab. Mr. G.S. Sirphikhi, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶11

Surinder Gupta, J

¶12

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of the FIR No.25 dated 15.02.2010 (Annexure P-1), registered for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 IPC at Police Station Qadian, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur on the basis of the compromise.

¶13

The FIR was got registered by Navjot Kaur wife of Naveen Kaplaysh. As per allegations in the FIR, there was matrimonial dispute over the demand of dowry and harassment of the petitioner.

¶14

Upon notice, Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Mr. G.S. Sirphikhi, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2-complainant.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

¶16

The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 17.10.2012 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

¶17

Deepak Kumar 2014.02.11 18:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document which has been signed by the Hon'ble Bench High Court, Chandigarh

¶18

-2-

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-26916 of 2012 (O&M)

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant has submitted that in view of the compromise, the private respondent (complainant) has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P/1) is quashed . Learned State counsel has also not disputed the settlement of the dispute of the parties through compromise.

¶21

The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for quashing the impugned FIR is that the offence under Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable. In case Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 , Full Bench of this Court has held that the FIR can be quashed on the basis of the compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even if the offence is not compoundable.

¶22

In the instant case, the compromise has been effected with the intervention of the respectables and now the parties wish to live in peace and harmony.

¶23

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties to this petition but also for their families and ultimately the society at large. The offence in this case is not so heinous or serious that it cannot be settled by the parties through compromise.

¶24

In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is quashed.

¶25

February 05, 2014 deepak

¶26

(Surinder Gupta) Judge

¶27

Deepak Kumar 2014.02.11 18:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document which has been signed by the Hon'ble Bench High Court, Chandigarh

Naveen Kaplaysh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Kaplaysh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Hariom Vs State of Haryana

Ranbir Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Ranjeet Dagar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Om Pal Vs Ranjit Singh Andors

Isher Kaur Vs Jai Lal

Sohni & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.