Allowed

Vishal Singh and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2016CRM-M/14428/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a complaint reference matter, quashed an FIR registered under Sections 498A and related provisions of the IPC. The court found that the parties had amicably resolved the matrimonial dispute through a compromise deed, supported by statements from both the complainant and the petitioner confirming the voluntary nature of the settlement. Quashing was deemed ap

What did the court decide?

FIR No.245 dated 22.06.2013 and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioners are quashed.

Vishal Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM No. M-14428 of 2016

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No. M-14428 of 2016 Date of decision: 05.10.2016

¶5

Vishal Singh and another

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present: Mr. Gopal Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Himmat Singh, DAG, Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

Ritu Bahri, J.

¶15

Quashing of FIR No.245 dated 22.06.2013, under Sections 498A/323/406/506/34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh (Annexure P-1) is sought on the basis of compromise dated 24.02.2016 (Annexure P-2).

¶16

The F.I.R was registered on the basis of complaint made by Preeti Tanwar-respondent No.2 to the effect that her marriage was solemnized with Vishal Singh-petitioner No.1 on 10.12.2009. There is no living issue from this wedlock. The petitioners gave beatings to her. She was harassed by the petitioners and turned out from the house on account of bringing insufficient

¶17

Anju 2016.10.18 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High court chandigarh

¶18

-2-

¶19

CRM No. M-14428 of 2016

¶20

dowry. In this background, the FIR was registered.

¶21

During the pendency of the trial, with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has now been amicably resolved between the the respondent No.2-complainant and the petitioners vide compromise deed dated 24.02.2016 (Annexure P-2).

¶22

In compliance with the order dated 08.08.2016 passed by this Court, the parties got recorded their statements before the trial Court. Report from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mahendergarh, has been received in this regard. As per report, Preeti Tanwar-respondent No.2 (complainant) made her statement on 06.09.2016 to the effect that she has compromised the matter with the petitioners at her own will and without any coercion or pressure. She has no objection if, the above said FIR is quashed. Statement of petitioner was also recorded to the same effect. In view of separate statements of the parties, the court is satisfied that the compromise is valid and genuine one.

¶23

Consequently, in view of the status report and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 , the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 , this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

¶24

Accordingly, FIR No.245 dated 22.06.2013, under Sections 498A/323/406/506/34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Mahendergarh, District

¶25

Anju 2016.10.18 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High court chandigarh

¶26

CRM No. M-14428 of 2016

¶27

-3-

¶28

Mahendergarh, is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners.

¶29

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.