Allowed

Satnam Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Mar 2015CRM-M/10391/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR under sections 406 and 498-A IPC. The court held that a genuine compromise negated the need for prosecution, ruling it an abuse of process to continue during, allowing the petition and quashing. Convictions, if any, were unaffected.

What did the court decide?

Quashed FIR No.48 dated 07.07.2012 registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC and all consequential proceedings arising out of it.

Satnam Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-10391 of 2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-10391 of 2014 Date of decision: 19.03.2015

¶5

Satnam Singh and another

¶6

....Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

1. Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶12

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

¶13

1. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

¶14

Present: - None for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Cheema, DAG, Punjab.

¶15

¶16

PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶17

This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashing of case FIR No.48 dated 07.07.2012 registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station Women Cell, Ludhiana, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P- 2) between the parties.

¶18

On 24.03.2014 notice of motion was issued and parties were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 07.04.2014 to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise/settlement and trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was directed to send the report.

¶19

RAVINDER SINGH 2015.03.20 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶20

-2-

¶21

Crl. Misc. No. M-10391 of 2014

¶22

In pursuance of order dated 24.03.2014, learned Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Ludhiana, has submitted her report, which indicates that parties appeared before her and got recorded their respective statements with regard to validity of compromise. As per the report, compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion from any corner. Now no dispute survives between the parties.

¶23

Consequently, in view of the compromise and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 , Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 , Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2014(2) RCR (Criminal) 482 and Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation, especially when this case does not fall within the category of exceptional cases where this Court should not exercise its inherent jurisdictional power to quash the criminal proceedings, as held in Gian Singh's case (supra). In the facts and circumstances of this case it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice,

¶24

RAVINDER SINGH 2015.03.20 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶25

-3-

¶26

Crl. Misc. No. M-10391 of 2014

¶27

therefore, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end.

¶28

The present petition is allowed. FIR No.48 dated 07.07.2012 registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station Women Cell, Ludhiana, along with all consequential proceedings arising out of it, on the basis of compromise, is quashed.

¶29

It is, however, made clear that if the proceedings already stand concluded and conviction recorded in the present case, this order shall be treated non est and, thus, will have no bearing on the conviction and sentence order.

¶30

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge

¶31

March 19, 2015 R.S.

¶32

RAVINDER SINGH 2015.03.20 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Satnam Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satnam Singh 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

Janak Singh Vs Pala Khan etc.

Gurdev Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ashutosh Shukla Vs State of Haryana

Bharat Vs State of Haryana

Kala Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kawaljit Singh Walia Vs Pankaj Kochar