SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kulwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 17 November, 2017


Criminal Misc. No. M- 4047 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : November 17, 2017

Kulwinder Singh …..Petitioner


State of Punjab and another ….Respondents


Present: Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.


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

petitioner in FIR No. 51 dated 01.10.2016 under Section 498A IPC

registered at Police Station Women, District Bathinda.

While issuing notice of motion, in this case, contentions noted

on behalf of the petitioner read as under:-

” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter
can be amicably resolved as the petitioner is ready to live with
his wife. It is submitted that the petitioner, who is serving the
Indian Armed Forces, can even seek his transfer to a family
station where both can live together.”

Respondent No. 2/complainant – the petitioner’s wife came

present before this Court on 05.04.2017 and submitted that she is ready and

willing to cohabit with the petitioner. It was submitted on behalf of the

petitioner that he would seek leave and bring back his wife to the

matrimonial home. The matter was placed before the Mediation and

1 of 3
22-11-2017 23:23:59 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 4047 of 2017 (OM) -2-

Conciliation Centre of this Court to work out the final details. However, the

petitioner did not come present except on one occasion. As per report dated

19.07.2017 by the Mediator, it is informed that when the petitioner was

contacted telephonically, he informed that he could not come present and

would appear only when the matter is fixed before the Court. The petitioner

appeared before this Court on 29.08.2017 and stated that while serving the

Indian Armed Forces, he met with an accident and his spine was injured in

the accident. He was admitted at the Command Hospital, Chandi Mandir,

therefore, could not come present for mediation. He was to be operated

upon in the near future. The petitioner again expressed his readiness and

willingness to cohabit with respondent No. 2. The matter was adjourned to

12.10.2017 and thereafter to 13.11.2017 when the following order was


” The petitioner as well as respondent no.2 duly identified by
their counsel are present in Court. Petitioner had come present
before this Court on 29.08.2017 and had submitted that he was
involved in an accident and he suffered a spine injury. He was to
be operated upon. The petitioner expressed his readiness and
willingness to cohabit with respondent no.2 thereafter. The matter
was accordingly adjourned.

Today, the petitioner, present in Court, states that he is not
ready and willing to cohabit with his wife-respondent no.2 in any
situation. No explanation is forthcoming for this volte face or the
reason for filing a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 in case the petitioner did not wish to reside with his
wife. Respondent no.2 has nevertheless expressed her willingness
to resume matrimonial ties with the petitioner. It appears that the
petitioner made an incorrect statement before this Court on
29.08.2017 only with a view to further enjoy the interim order
granted by this Court.

2 of 3
22-11-2017 23:24:01 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 4047 of 2017 (OM) -3-

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage seeks a
short adjournment.

On request, adjourned to 17.11.2017. “

The position is no different today, therefore, keeping in view

the conduct of the petitioner, no ground whatsoever is made out to afford

the concession of anticipatory bail to him.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Lisa Gill)
November 17, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3
22-11-2017 23:24:01 :::

1 thought on “Kulwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 17 November, 2017

  1. Sir/Madm, in our society the office bearers are issued me a false notice that i had taken water connection of my flat direct from water tank, and then after called me in society common office and beated me brutaly the police is registered a caseU/s. 324, 504, 506 of IPC against me due to thier influance and then after due to fracture of my 7 left side fracture which i recieved due to thier assault is also lodged FIR againt the U/s. 325, 34 of IPC. Now they applied to court to add section 452 of IPC in me in the saif FIR, Can the section 452 of IPC can be add by magistrate in against me, please advice, I am a senior citizen and worrying about it, please guide me My MOb. No. Mirza

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh