Kamlesh Devi And ANR v. State Of Haryana

[1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: October 08, 2015 Kamlesh Devi & Anr.

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr.Pawan Gaur, AAG, Haryana.

Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the informant.

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C., is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, Kamlesh Devi (mother-in-law) and Deepti Gupta (married sister-in-law/nanad of Neetu), who have been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.195, dated 26.03.2015, registered at Police Station, Civil Lines, Karnal.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have joined the investigation; during pendency of the present petition, better sense has prevailed and

[2] both the private factions have resolved the dispute and effected a compromise. In compliance thereof, the petitioners and the husband of the informant/complainant have agreed to pay a sum of `12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lacs and sixty thousand only) to the informant/complainant. The said amount shall be paid to the informant/complainant at the time of filing of a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act and a petition for quashing of the FIR of the present case.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Dharam Pal, Police Station, Civil Lines, Karnal, very fairly concedes that the petitioners have joined the investigation. Mr.Parminder Singh, learned counsel for the informant has agreed that on the payment of `12,60,000/- (Rupees twelve lacs and sixty thousand only) by the petitioners and the husband of the informant, the informant/complainant shall have no objection for quashing of the impugned FIR and filing of the petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act within six months of passing of this order. He further submits that he has no objection if the petitioners are granted the concession of anticipatory bail.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. Interim directions dated 19.05.2015 issued by this Court are made absolute.

The petitioners shall continue to join the investigation

[3] as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2), Cr.P.C. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE October 8, 2015 seema

[4]