SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ranjit Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 28 May, 2019

CRM-M-16291-2019 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

287 CRM-M-16291-2019

Date of Decision:28.05.2019

Ranjit Singh and others …..Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another …..Respondents

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

Present: None 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 FIR No.40 dated 26.07.2018 under Sections 406, Section498-A, Section120-B

IPC, registered at Police Station Tallewal, District Barnala (Annexure P-1)

and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise dated 30.03.2019 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 08.04.2019 had directed the parties

to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court 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 Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 23-06-2019 20:19:03 :::
CRM-M-16291-2019 2

Barnala and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so

recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 26.04.2019 to the

effect that the parties have compromised the matter and the same is

voluntarily, without any pressure and coercion.

Though, today no one is present on behalf of respondent No.2-

complainant, namely, Upkar Kaur, but no prejudice would be caused to her

as she has already made a statement with regard to compromise before the

learned Magistrate on 24.04.2019. The same is reproduced as under:-

“Stated that I have got lodged FIR No. 40 dated
26.07.2018, u/s 498A/406/120-B SectionIPC, PS Tallewal
against the accused Ranjit Singh son of Darshan Singh,
Jora Singh son of Mohinder Singh and Surjit Kaur wife
of Darshan Singh, all residents of Barmi, District
Ludhiana. Now, I have effected compromise with the
above said accused persons with the intervention of the
respectable of the society and the copy of which is Ex.PX
upon which I identify my signatures. The original
compromise is placed before the Hon’ble High Court
Chandigarh. The compromise has been effected
voluntarily and without any pressure or coercion in any
manner. Photo copy of my Adhar card is Mark A. I have
no objection if the above said FIR and its consequential
proceedings are quashed by Hon’ble High Court as I
have been residing with above said Ranjit Singh
peacefully at my matrimonial house.”

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 F.I.R.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gold Quest International Private

2 of 3
23-06-2019 20:19:04 :::
CRM-M-16291-2019 3

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

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

or are civil property disputes with criminal facets, if the parties enter into a

settlement, and it becomes clear that there are no chances of conviction,

there is no illegality in quashing the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

read with SectionArticle 226 of the Constitution of India.

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, as approved by the

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

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

Limited’s case (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.40 dated

26.07.2018 under Sections 406, Section498-A, Section120-B IPC, registered at Police

Station Tallewal, District Barnala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 30.03.2019

(Annexure P-2) are hereby quashed qua the petitioners, subject to payment

of costs of ` 10,000/- to be paid by the petitioners, within a period of one

month from today with the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER,

Chandigarh. They shall produce a receipt with the Registry.

May 28, 2019 (HARI PAL VERMA)
seema JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No

3 of 3
23-06-2019 20:19:04 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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