SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Karan Kochar vs State Of Haryana on 26 July, 2017

CRM No.M-3397 of 2017 [1]


Criminal Misc. No.M- 3397 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: July 26 , 2017.

Karan Kochar …… PETITIONER (s)


State of Punjab …… RESPONDENT (s)


Present: Mr. Vaibhav Parashar, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. L.S.Lakhanpal, Advocate
for the complainant.
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?


Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner in FIR No.201 dated 08.11.2016 under Sections 406/498A IPC

registered at Police Station Sadar Khanna, District Ludhiana.

It is submitted that during the pendency of this petition, the parties

have amicably resolved the entire dispute between them. The terms and

conditions of the settlement have been reduced into writing on 18.07.2017. A

photocopy of the said agreement, produced in Court today, is taken on record

1 of 2
30-07-2017 18:28:44 :::
CRM No.M-3397 of 2017 [2]

subject to just exceptions. It is informed that a petition under Section 13B of the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed by the petitioner and the complainant.

Statements of the parties at first motion have been recorded. It is thus prayed

that this petition be allowed.

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, learned

counsel for the complainant submits that his client has no objection if this

petition is allowed subject to strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the

agreement by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Amarjeet

Singh, affirms that the petitioner has joined investigation, in the meanwhile.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, especially

the settlement arrived at between the parties but without commenting upon or

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

expedient to allow this petition.

In the event of arrest of the petitioner, he be released on bail to the

satisfaction of Investigating Officer. He shall join investigation as may be

required. Petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated in Section 438

(2) Cr.P.C.

Petition is allowed.

However, liberty is afforded to the complainant to file appropriate

application in case the terms and conditions of settlement between the parties are

not adhered to by the petitioner.

July 26 , 2017. JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

2 of 2
30-07-2017 18:28:45 :::

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