Allowed

Vikas Garg and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Mar 2021CRM-M/1935/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed petitioner's petition for quashing FIR No. 54 dated 05.09.2019 registered under Sections 34, 406, 498-A IPC. The Court relied on a compromise deed between parties and a verified report from the JMIC confirming the compromise was voluntary, relying on Apex Court and Full Bench precedents.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 54 dated 05.09.2019 and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Vikas Garg and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

220

¶3

CRM-M-1935-2021 Decided on : 18.03.2021

¶4

Vikas Garg and others

¶5

. . . Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and another

¶8

. . . Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶10

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶11

PRESENT: Mr. G.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶12

Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Armaan Gagneja, Advocate for respondent No.2 - complainant. ****

¶14

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral)

¶15

The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 54, dated 05.09.2019, lodged under Sections 34, 406, 498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Women, District Bathinda (Annexure P-1) and all the consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise deed dated 03.01.2021 (Annexure P-3) arrived at, between the parties.

¶16

Vide order dated 14^th January, 2021 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 18^th February, 2021, to get their statements recorded, regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

¶17

Report has since been received from the learned JMIC, Bathinda, in pursuance to the direction of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and JAWALA RAM2021.03.18 15:17 confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

CRM-M-1935-2021 - 2 -

¶19

the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that she would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed. The trial Court has annexed the photocopies of the statements of the parties along with its report.

¶20

Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.

¶21

In view of the report of the learned JMIC, Bathinda, and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 , and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

¶22

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.

¶23

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE

¶24

March 18, 2021 J.Ram

¶25

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶26

JAWALA RAM 2021.03.18 15:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Vikas Garg and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Garg and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Hussan Banno Vs State of Punjab and Others

Muskan Sood and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Salman @ Salman Mohd. Vs State of Punjab

Arun @ Vishal Vs State of Haryana

Harpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab