SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Varinderpal And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 1 May, 2018

Crl. Misc. No.M-10451 of 2018 (OM) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No.M-10451 of 2018 (OM)
Date of decision : 01.05.2018

Varinderpal and another

……Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and another
…Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY

Present: None for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Sharda, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

None for respondent no.2.

****

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J(ORAL)
The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No. 340 dated

08.10.2014 registered under Sections 498-A IPC (Section 406 IPC added

subsequently), Police Station Chherretta, District Amritsar and the

consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written

compromise arrived at between the parties.

Report has been received from the trial Court after statements

of the parties were recorded regarding the compromise. The trial Court has

reported that the compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or

coercion. The trial Court has also sent statements of parties in original.

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that

petitioners are the only accused and respondent no.2 is the only aggrieved

person in this FIR.

1 of 2
06-05-2018 20:30:08 :::
Crl. Misc. No.M-10451 of 2018 (OM) 2

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR pending.

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the

principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder

Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR

(Criminal) 1052, approved by Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State

of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, the instant petition is allowed and

the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis

thereof are quashed qua the petitioners.

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of

compromise and their statements made in the Court below.

01.05.2018 (ANITA CHAUDHRY)
sunil JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
06-05-2018 20:30:09 :::

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Your email address will not be published.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