Quashed

Pardeep Kumar Tandon and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2016CRM-M/18957/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed an FIR registered under sections 498-A and 406 IPC. The court relied on a reported compromise and recorded statements by the parties indicating genuine settlement, concluding that prolonging litigation served no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.01 dated 03.01.2014 under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC and all consequential proceedings therefrom qua the petitioners were quashed.

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

¶1

CRM No. M-18957 of 2016

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No. M-18957 of 2016 Date of decision: 05.10.2016

¶5

Pardeep Kumar Tandon and another

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present: Ms. Satwant Mehta, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Anmol Grewal, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Sadhu Ram, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

Ritu Bahri, J.

¶15

Quashing of FIR No.01 dated 03.01.2014, under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC, registered at Police Station, Women, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) is sought on the basis of compromise dated 14.05.2016 (Annexure P-2).

¶16

The F.I.R was registered on the basis of complaint made by Sunita Rani @ Sheetal-respondent No.2 to the effect that her marriage was solemnized with Amit-petitioner on 26.06.2012. The petitioners gave beatings to her. She was physically and mentally harassed by the petitioners on account of bringing insufficient dowry and her husband had illicit relations with his Bhabi Vaneeta. In this background, the FIR was registered.

¶17

During the pendency of the trial, with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has now been amicably resolved between the respondent No.2-complainant and the petitioner vide compromise deed dated 14.05.2016 (Annexure P-2).

¶18

Anju 2016.10.18 09:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High court chandigarh

¶19

CRM No. M-18957 of 2016 -2-

¶20

In compliance with the order dated 28.05.2016 passed by this Court, the parties got recorded their statements before the trial Court. Report from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, has been received in this regard. As per report, Sunita Rani @ Sheetal-respondent No.2 (complainant) made her statement on 11.07.2016 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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Accordingly, FIR No.01 dated 03.01.2014, under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC, registered at Police Station, Women, District Ludhiana, is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners.

¶23

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

October 05, 2016

¶25

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

¶26

anju

¶27

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable : No

¶28

Anju 2016.10.18 09:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High court chandigarh

Pardeep Kumar Tandon and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pardeep Kumar Tandon 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

Subhash Chand & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ravinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Puneet Vir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kuldeep Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Vikas Chanana and Other Vs State of Haryana