Allowed

Navdeep Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Dec 2016CRM-M/8662/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed FIR No. 11 and all consequent proceedings registered under Sections 406, 420, 498-A, and 120-B IPC regarding a domestic dispute. The court relied on a genuine post-facto compromise certified genuine by the trial court to avoid serving any useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 11 and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof qua the petitioners.

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

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-8662 of 2016

¶2

-1-

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-8662 of 2016 Date of Decision: 14.12.2016

¶5

Navdeep Kumar and another

¶6

......Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

¶10

Present: Mr. Barjesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. Mohd. Salim, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶13

¶14

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J(ORAL)

¶15

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 11 dated 30.1.2016 registered under Sections 406, 420, 498-A, 120-B IPC, Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶16

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 genuine and without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. The trial Court has also sent the statements of the parties and the copy of the compromise.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioners are the only accused and respondent No. 2 is the only aggrieved

¶18

Gurpreet Singh Bhatia 2016.12.15 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-8662 of 2016

¶20

-2-

¶21

person in this FIR.

¶22

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR pending.

¶23

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 Vs. 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 petitioners.

¶24

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

¶25

(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE

¶26

December 14, 2016 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No

¶27

Gurpreet Singh Bhatia 2016.12.15 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Navdeep Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navdeep Kumar & Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harmesh Kaur & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Gurbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sampuran Singh Vs Gurdev Kaur

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

Santokh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kailash Nath Aggarwal & Anr. Vs State of Punjab