SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ritesh Sangar vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 7 February, 2019

269.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-47396-2018
Date of decision:07.02.2019.

RITESH SANGAR … Petitioner

versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ANR …. Respondents

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

Present: None for the petitioner.

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

Nonefor 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.130 dated 12.09.2013 registered under Sections 498-

A, 406, 506 of IPC at Police Station Division No.2, District Pathankot

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

basis of compromise dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 30.11.2018 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 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot and got their statements

recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has

submitted report dated 11.01.2019 to the effect that the compromise has
1 of 3
17-02-2019 10:07:31 :::
CRM-M-47396-2018 -2-

been effected between the parties with their free will and without any

pressure or coercion.

Though today none has put in appearance on behalf of

respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Rabia Sangar, but no prejudice

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

compromise before learned Magistrate on 07.01.2019. The same is

reproduced as under:-

“That I had lodged FIR no.130 dated 12.09.2013, U/s
498-A, 406, 506 of
IPC, PS Division No.2, Pathankot, against
the accused Ritesh Sangar. That I have compromised/settled the
matter with accused and as per the compromise we have also
filed petition under
Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. I have
no objection if the FIR no.130 dated 12.09.2013, U/s 498A,
406, 506 of
IPC, PS Division No.2, Pathankot, is quashed. That
I am the complainant in the said F.I.R. and today I am giving
my statement out of my free will and consent, without any
coercion and there is no pressure on me.”

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

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

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.

2 of 3
17-02-2019 10:07:32 :::
CRM-M-47396-2018 -3-

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.130 dated

12.09.2013 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 of IPC at Police

Station Division No.2, District Pathankot (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of

compromise dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure P-2), however, that would be

subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Poor

Patients’ Welfare Fund of the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education

and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, within 15 days from today.

(HARI PAL VERMA)
JUDGE
07.02.2019
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No

3 of 3
17-02-2019 10:07:32 :::

Leave a Reply

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

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