Allowed

Naveen Kumar v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Dec 2016CRM-M/13601/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of FIR and proceedings under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC due to a settled compromise. The High Court noted the trial Court’s report confirming free consent, relied on precedent, and allowed the petition to quash proceedings against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 124 dated 29.11.2013 and all consequent proceedings are quashed against the petitioner.

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M-13601 of 2016(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-13601 of 2016(O&M) Date of Order:07.12.2016

¶5

Naveen Kumar ..Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

¶10

Present: Mr. Barjinder Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. K.S.Aulakh, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

None for respondent no.2.

¶13

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J. (Oral)

¶14

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.124, dated 29.11.2013, registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC, Police Station Women Police, Patiala and all the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶15

Report has been received from the trial Court after statements of the parties were recorded regarding the compromise. The trial Court has reported that the compromise is with their free consent and without any pressure and coercion and undue influence. The trial court has also sent photocopies of statements of parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that Naresh Kumar 2016.12.08 10:22petitioner is the only accused and respondent no.2 is the only I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M-13601 of 2016(O&M)

¶18

-2-

¶19

aggrieved person in this FIR.

¶20

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR

¶21

pending.

¶22

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal), 1052 , approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof are quashed qua the petitioner.

¶23

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below.

¶24

December 07, 2016 (ANITA CHAUDHRY) nt JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶25

Naresh Kumar 2016.12.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Naveen Kumar v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Kumar v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurbhej Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Mandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Vishal Sharma Vs State of Punjab

Irfan @ Aminudin @ Chhote @ Jabruddin and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Tarsem Singh Vs Beant Kaur and Anr.

Ajit Kumar Vs State of Haryana