Allowed
Davinder Kumar v. State of Punjab
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/21608/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA…
What the court decided
AI extract
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM-M-21608-2015 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-21608-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 08.02.2017
Davinder Kumar
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Manpreet Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.
Complainant in person.
RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in a case arising out of FIR No.35 dated 25.05.2015, registered at Police Station Women Cell, District Jalandhar, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 IPC.
Vide order dated 07.07.2015 of this Court, the anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner to enable him to join the investigation. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court to enable the parties to resolve the disputes.
On the last date of hearing, the following order was passed by
this Court: -
“Petitioner who is present in Court submits that he is ready to give
Rs.10 lacs to the complainant towards full and final settlement.
Naresh Kumar 2017.02.09 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-21608-2015 (O&M)
-2-
Complainant who is present in the Court states that she needs some time to think about it.
Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Tarsem Kaur has further informed that offence under Section 406 IPC has been deleted on 01.06.2016.
List on 08.02.2017.
Interim order to continue.”
Today, complainant is present in Court and states that she does not want to accept the offer made by the petitioner.
Keeping in view the facts that an attempt between the parties has been made and the complainant has refused to accept an offer of 10 lacs towards full and final settlement; further an offence under Section 406 IPC has already been deleted on 01.06.2016, the order dated 07.07.2015, passed by this Court whereby the ad-interim anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposit a sum of 3 lacs in the shape of FD in the name of the complainant, before the trial Court, within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the said amount will be adjusted towards arrears of maintenance at the final stage of the trial. Moreover, the petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.
February 08, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE
| Whether speaking/reasoned | Yes |
|---|---|
| Whether reportable | No |
Naresh Kumar 2017.02.09 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Davinder Kumar
State of Punjab
Ritu Bahri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court