High Court of Punjab & Haryana allowed criminal miscellaneous petition quashing conviction orders dated 23.12.2015 and 19.04.2016, as the matter stood compromised via a deed dated 01.07.2016 and the original complainant had no objection to quashing.
Quashed order dated 23.12.2015 and order dated 19.04.2016.
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.
Crl. Misc. No. M-42038 of 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-42038 of 2016 Date of decision : 21.02.2017
Seema Bai and others
......Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and anr.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. A.K. Sama, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr. Jaspreet Sekhon, AAG, Punjab
Mr. Manu Loona, Advocate for respondent No. 2
RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of order dated 23.12.2015 passed by learned JMIC Abohar in Crl. Case No. 196-A of 14.05.2013, vide which the petitioners have been convicted under Section 323/34 IPC and order dated 19.04.2016 (P-2) passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fazilka.
Petitioners are seeking quashing of the above said order, as the matter stands compromised between the parties vide compromise deed dated 01.07.2016 (P-3). Further petitioner No. 1 was the complainant in FIR No. 58 dated 24.04.2013 under Section 498-A/406/323/325/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka, which was quashed vide CRM-M-43972 of 2016, vide separate order.
A bare perusal of the impugned order dated 23.12.2015 shows GAURAV ARORA that the petitioner were convicted but they were released on probation by 2017.02.23 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-42038 of 2016
2
the learned Court on furnishing of their bail bonds. Against this order, they preferred appeal and revision petition, which was dismissed, vide order dated 19.04.2016.
The allegations against the petitioner that they have beaten respondent No. 2 and his family members
This petition is liable to be allowed, as the matter stands compromised between the parties and petitioner No. 1 who was also the complainant in the above said F.I.R has given her statement that she has no objection if the F.I.R be quashed against respondent No. 2 and others, who were accused in the F.I.R.
In the present case as well, the matter stands compromised between the parties, vide compromise deed dated 01.07.2016.
Once the connected petition i.e CRM-M-43972 of 2016 has been allowed, on the statement of petitioner No. 1, vide separate order of even date and the present matter has also been compromised between the parties, the present petition stands allowed and order dated 23.12.2015 and 19.04.2016 (P-2) are hereby quashed.
21.02.2017 G Arora
(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No
Yes
GAURAV ARORA 2017.02.23 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the convicting order and appellate order should be quashed when the matter is compromised between the parties
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Seema Bai
State of Punjab
RITU BAHRI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
