SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 27 May, 2019

CRM-M No. 9886 of 2019 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
245
*****
CRM-M No. 9886 of 2019
Date of decision : 27.5.2019

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Singh ……..Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and another …….Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI

Present: Mr. D.B. Bhargav, Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab
Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate, for respondent No. 2

RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, J.

By invoking Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (in short,

“SectionCr.P.C.”), the petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No.62 dated

4.8.2018 for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal

Code (in short, “SectionIPC”), registered at Police Station Bhagwantpura, District

Rupnagar and proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of compromise

dated 17.8.2018 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

In the present case, the FIR was registered on the statement of

Jaspreet Kaur d/o Gurmeet Singh. Now, dispute between the parties has

been resolved by way of compromise Annexures P-2.

Vide order dated 8.4.2019, the parties were directed to appear

before the trial Court to get their statements recorded with regard to

genuineness of compromise and to pay Rs.15,000/-to respondent No.2 as

litigation expenses.

Pursuant thereto, amount of Rs.15,000/-has been paid by way

1 of 2
09-06-2019 17:02:38 :::
CRM-M No. 9886 of 2019 -2-

of demand draft, copy of which is taken on record. A report has been

submitted by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rupnagar, wherein it has been

reported that statements of the parties have been recorded and they have

voluntarily compromised the matter without any coercion or undue

influence.

Counsel for the State and respondent No. 2 have not disputed

that the parties i.e. petitioner and respondent No.2 have arrived at a

settlement with an intent to give burial to their differences.

Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case

squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High

Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Keeping

in view authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme

Court in ‘SectionGian Singh v. State of Punjab and another’, 2012 (4) R.C.R.

(Criminal) 543 and in the light of facts and circumstances discussed

hereinbefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of

criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and it is

expedient in the interest of justice that the same are put to an end.

For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed, FIR No.62

dated 4.8.2018 for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian

Penal Code (in short, “SectionIPC”), registered at Police Station Bhagwantpura,

District Rupnagar and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua

the petitioner.

(RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI)
JUDGE
27.5.2019
Ashwani

Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Reportable Yes/No

2 of 2
09-06-2019 17:02:38 :::

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