SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Lakhwinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 3 April, 2019

259.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-19067-2018
Date of decision:03.04.2019

LAKHWINDER SINGH AND ORS … Petitioners

versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR …. Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
—-

Present: Mr. Varinder Chhibbar, Advocate,
for the petitioners.

Mr.Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.

None for respondent No.2.

—-

HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for

quashing of F.I.R. No.113 dated 13.06.2015 registered under Sections

323/324/406/498A/148/149 of IPC at Police Station Sadar Patiala, District

Patiala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on

the basis of settlement/compromise dated 16.04.2018 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 16.01.2019 had directed the parties

to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements

recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the

genuineness of the compromise.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala and got their statements

recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has
1 of 3
14-04-2019 05:48:31 :::
CRM-M-19067-2018 -2-

submitted report dated 20.02.2019 to the effect that the compromise is

genuine and has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without

any coercion or undue influence.

Though today none has put in appearance on behalf of

respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Sandeep Kaur but no prejudice

would be caused to her as she has already made her statement with regard to

compromise before learned Magistrate on 20.02.2019. The same is

reproduced as under:-

“I am resident of above said address and I got registered
the FIR No.113 dated 13.6.2015 U/s 323, 324, 406, 498-A, 148,
149
IPC Police Station Sadar Patiala against the accused
Lakhwinder Singh, Bagh Singh, Paramjit Kaur, Maninder Kaur
@ Nishu, Baljinder Kaur @ Joni, Charanjit Kaur, Prem Singh
all residents of Hagobind Colony Bahadurgarh District Patiala
but now I have compromised the matter with all the aforesaid
accused vide written compromise dated 16.4.2018 which is
EX.CX (Original seen and returned) and I have no objection if
the present FIR against all the above said accused is quashed. I
have suffered the said statement without any force, fraud and
undue influence from any body.”

Learned State counsel has not disputed the factum of

compromise between the parties.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to

continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gold Quest International Private

Limited Versus State of Tamil Nadu and others-2014 (4) RCR (Criminal)

206 has held that the disputes which are substantially matrimonial in nature,

or the civil property disputes with criminal facets, if the parties have entered

2 of 3
14-04-2019 05:48:31 :::
CRM-M-19067-2018 -3-

into settlement, and it has become clear that there are no chances of

conviction, there is no illegality in quashing the proceedings under Section

482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 226 of the Constitution.

Thus, following the principles laid down by the Full Bench

judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of

Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others

(2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in the light of Gold Quest International Private

Limited’s case (supra), this petition is allowed and F.I.R. No.113 dated

13.06.2015 registered under Sections 323/324/406/498A/148/149 of IPC at

Police Station Sadar Patiala, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) and all

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on

the basis of settlement/compromise dated 16.04.2018 (Annexure P-2).

(HARI PAL VERMA)
JUDGE
03.04.2019
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No

3 of 3
14-04-2019 05:48:31 :::

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh