SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Court On Its Own Motion vs Gurmeet Singh S/O Mani Singh R/O … on 8 August, 2018

C.O.C.P. NO.3581 OF 2014 :{ 1 }:

C.O.C.P. NO.3581 OF 2014

Court on its own motion



Gurmeet Singh



Present: Mr. K.B.S.Mann, Advocate
for wife-Charanjit Kaur.

Mr. P.S.Brar, Advocate,
for the respondent-husband.



This petition has been initiated by the Court on its own motion,

proceeding on the assumption that the respondent had made a wrong

statement in the Court about his wife not joining him. This has been

asserted to be so in the light of the fact that he was already residing with

another lady, Sandeep Kaur, with whom she was in a live-in relationship,

which fact is disputed by the respondent by asserting that after his wife,

namely, Charanjit Kaur, had left the matrimonial home, although the wife

states that she had been thrown out of the house, Sandeep Kaur was looking

after the household affairs and he has never married with her as was initially

asserted and complained by Charanjit Kaur.

I have perused the order passed by this Court as also the reply,

1 of 3
13-08-2018 01:16:00 :::
C.O.C.P. NO.3581 OF 2014 :{ 2 }:

which has been filed by respondent, Gurmeet Singh. Perusal of the said

reply explains the position as far as he is concerned. It has been explained

that it was during the mediation proceedings that a compromise was entered

into between the parties on 17.10.2011 and on the basis of the said

compromise, both the parties made their respective statements in Court that

they were residing happily as husband and wife since 22.11.2011 and

further that that pending case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as also case under

Sections 406, 498A IPC and the appeal pending against the acquittal order

passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa in FIR No.164, dated

04.08.2001 between the parties were to be withdrawn and on the basis of

said compromise, the divorce decree was set-aside by this Court on


It is after that when the appeal preferred by the contemner-

respondent Gurmeet Singh against the acquittal of the brothers of Charanjit

Kaur was withdrawn on 15.03.2012 and on the very next day his wife left

the house, review application was moved by him, where a statement was

given by Charanjit Kaur that respondent Gurmeet Singh has already married

with Sandeep Kaur. On the asking of the Court, an enquiry was held by the

Assistant Superintendent of Police, Sirsa, who submitted his report dated

22.10.2013 wherein it was concluded by him that there is no proof with

regard to there being another married solemnized between Gurmeet Singh

and Sandeep Kaur and rather Gurmeet Singh had brought Sandeep Kaur to

his house with the consent of her parents to do the household work and to

maintain his house.

In view of the said report, it cannot be said that there has been a

marriage solemnized by Gurmeet Singh with Sandeep Kaur. The allegations

2 of 3
13-08-2018 01:16:00 :::
C.O.C.P. NO.3581 OF 2014 :{ 3 }:

against the respondent that he had falsely made a statement before this

Court that they were residing together happily again cannot be said to be a

false statement as at that moment both the parties had given their respective

statements in the Court. It is not a case that the respondent and his wife,

Charanjit Kaur, had not cohabited after the compromise was entered into

between the parties or that they did not continue to stay together after the

passing of the order dated 02.03.2012 but it is subsequently that certain

dispute between the parties had arisen and Charanjit Kaur left the house of

the respondent, may be for any reason.

Therefore, without going into the aspect with regard to the

reasons as to whether the wife left the matrimonial home or she was thrown

out of the same, this Court gives benefit of doubt to respondent, Gurmeet

Singh and does not find him guilty of having made a false statement before

the Court.

In view of the above, the present contempt petition stands

disposed of.

Rule issued against the respondent stands discharged.

August 08, 2018 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH )
khurmi JUDGE

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

3 of 3
13-08-2018 01:16:00 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation