✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 21 Aug 2012

Date of Decision: August 21 v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

and relatives, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No

Key paragraphs

  • Para 10521052. Since the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature and the same has been settled due to intervention of the respectable persons and relatives, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 159 dated 07.03.2011, under Sections 406/498-A/506 IPC, registered at…

Judgment

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Ashwani Gaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep S.Mann, Sr.DAG, Haryana. Respondent no.2-complainant in person. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.159 dated 07.03.2011 under Sections 406/498-A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar, Annexure P1, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, Annexure P, having been entered into between the parties. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that CRM No.M-3492 of 2012 2 dispute between the parties has since been settled due to intervention of respectable persons and relatives from both the sides. It is further contended that pursuance to compromise, both the parties filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and divorce has since been granted by competent court. This fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for respondent-State. Even respondent No.2–complainant has also come present in the Court and stated that matter has since been compromised and that she is having no objection if the FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed. In appropriate cases FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.)

#1052. Since the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature and the same has been settled due to intervention of the respectable persons and relatives, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 159 dated 07.03.2011, under Sections 406/498-A/506 IPC, registered at police station Civil Lines, Hisar, Annexure P1 alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioner –Surender Kumar is, hereby, quashed. August 21, 2012. ‘om’ ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: and relatives, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 13B.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 21 Aug 2012. The bench was RAM CHAND GUPTA.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments