Jagtar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 1 November, 2017

220 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 29195 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : November 01, 2017

Jagtar Singh and another …..Petitioners

Versus
State of Punjab ….Respondent

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. G.S. Baath, Advocate for
Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sandeep Godara, Advocate for
Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Rehan, Advocate
for the complainant.

***
LISA GILL, J.

The petitioners, who are the parents-in-law of the complainant,

seek the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 126 dated 17.07.2017

under Sections 406, 498A, 313, 120B IPC registered at Police Station City

Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur.

The matter was placed before the Mediation and Conciliation

Centre of this Court. It is informed that the matter has been amicably

resolved between the parties. The terms and conditions were reduced to

writing on 13.09.2017. Settlement dated 13.09.2017 is attached with the file

of this case. It is agreed between the parties that petition under Section 13B

of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 shall be filed by the petitioners’ son and the

complainant. A sum of `41 lakhs towards permanent alimony – past, present

and future claims of the complainant as well as the child would be paid in

four instalments. It is informed that the first instalment of `10 lakhs has

already been handed over to the complainant. The petitioners and

1 of 2
04-11-2017 18:36:41 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 29195 of 2017 (OM) -2-

their son, it is submitted, shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of

the above said settlement and undertake to carry out their part of the

settlement.

Learned counsel for the complainant verifies the factum of the

settlement between the parties as well as receipt of `10 lakhs. It is submitted

that the complainant has no objection in case this petition is allowed subject

to strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the settlement by the

petitioners.

Learned counsel for the State verifies that the petitioners have

joined investigation.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noted above,

specifically the settlement/compromise dated 13.09.2017 but without

expressing any opinion on the merits of case, it is considered just and

expedient to allow this petition. Consequently, order dated 11.08.2017 is

made absolute.

However, liberty is afforded to the complainant to move an

appropriate application in this matter, in case the terms and conditions of

settlement between the parties are not adhered to by the petitioners.

(Lisa Gill)
November 01, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
04-11-2017 18:36:42 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *