CRM No.M-34268 of 2017
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M- 34268 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: February 12 , 2018.
Manpreet Singh …… PETITIONER (s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Tarun Vir Singh Lehal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.
The complainant/respondent No.2 in-person.
*****
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?
*****
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in FIR No.46 dated 04.08.2017 under Sections 406/498A IPC
registered at Police Station Qadian, District Gurdaspur.
It is informed that the matter has been resolved between the parties
during the pendency of this petition. The petitioner and respondent No.2 have
decided to part ways. Petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 has been filed. It is submitted that CRM No.M-822 of 2018 has been filed
for quashing of the abovesaid FIR on the basis of settlement arrived at between
1 of 2
25-02-2018 08:23:02 :::
CRM No.M-34268 of 2017
-2-
the parties. It is prayed that this petition be allowed.
The complainant/respondent No.2, duly identified by HC Partap
Singh, is present in Court. She affirms and verifies the factum of settlement and
states that she has no objection in case this petition is allowed subject to the
petitioner strictly adhering to the terms and conditions of the settlement.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, specifically
the settlement 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
petition. In the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail to
the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. Petitioner shall comply
with the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
However, liberty is afforded to the complainant/respondent No.2 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 petitioner
It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall
be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely
confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.
( LISA GILL )
February 12 , 2018. JUDGE
‘om’
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
25-02-2018 08:23:04 :::
