SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sukhvir Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 30 March, 2017

CRM-M No.12725 of 2016 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M No.12725 of 2016
Date of Decision: 30.03.2017

SUKHVIR SINGH AND ANR. ……Petitioners
Vs
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. …..Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Deep Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Vishal Munjal, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****

RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral)

The present petition was filed on 08.04.2016 on the

basis of the then compromise dated 31.03.2016 vide which it

was resolved between the parties for separation. However, at a

subsequent stage parties in their wisdom reconciled the dispute

and decided to live together in order to save their matrimonial

ties.

Vide order dated 19.01.2017, this Court has noticed the

present status of the parties in the context of their willingness to

live together and to bury the ongoing litigation between them.

The following order was passed on that day:-

“Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate, appears on
behalf of respondent No. 2 and files Power of Attorney. The

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 08-04-2017 23:18:32 :::
CRM-M No.12725 of 2016 2
same is taken on record subject to just exceptions.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.
26, dated 17.02.2016 (Annexure P-1) registered under
Sections 498A, 323,506,34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC‘

– for short) at Police Station Sadar Khanna, Police District
Khanna, on the basis of compromise dated 31.03.2016
(Annexure P-3) entered into between the parties.

As per compromise (Annexure P-3) it was decided
by petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 to seek divorce by
filing a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage
Act. Learned counsel for the parties, however, submit that
subsequently petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 have
decided to live together. The petition under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act has been withdrawn on 03.11.2016.
Both of them are cohabiting together along with their minor
daughter.

Petitioner No. 1 and well as respondent No. 2 are
both present in the Court. Respondent No. 2-Amandeep
Kaur, who is duly identified by her counsel, reiterates the
above said position and states that as she is living with her
husband, she does not wish to pursue the above said FIR.

In view of above, the parties are directed to
appear before the learned trial Court on 31.01.2017. Their
statements in respect to the compromise shall be recorded
on the said date or any other date subject to the
convenience of the trial Court. Report be submitted by the
said Court in regard to the genuineness of the compromise,
whether it has been entered into out of the free will and
volition of the parties, without any fear, apprehension,
undue influence or coercion. The total number of accused
persons be intimated. It should also be informed whether
any of the petitioners are proclaimed offenders. Any other
case pending against the petitioners should also be noted.

2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 08-04-2017 23:18:33 :::
CRM-M No.12725 of 2016 3
List on 30.03.2017.”

In compliance of the aforesaid order, both the parties

have got recorded their statements before the Judicial

Magistrate, Ist Class, Khanna on 31.01.2017. Factum of

compromise and living together have been duly endorsed by the

parties in their statements. Even today both the parties i.e.

husband and wife are present in Court. They have been

identified by their respective counsel. They have endorsed their

living together now.

In view of above, I am of the view that continuation of

the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law.

In order to achieve the ends of justice, it would be just and

appropriate to culminate the criminal prosecution in the interest

of both the parties.

Accordingly, FIR No.26 dated 17.02.2016 under

Sections 498A, 323, 506, 34 IPC registered at Police Station

Sadar Khanna, Police District Khanna along with all other

consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby

quashed.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

March 30, 2017 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Atik JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

3 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 08-04-2017 23:18:33 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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