← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/284/2016allowed

Pooja Bhargav @ Pooja Sardana v. State Of Punjab & ANR

2016-04-11Mr Justice Rajiv Sharma3 pages



     

  

 

!"#"

$"%&

!""

'"("  ) 

()

*) +,+ ") - ,(!"./"( )  )+ (')(+ 0 1#23 0304  Present : Mr. Bhrigu Dutt Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. B. S. Jaswal, Advocate for respondent No.2.      The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.249 dated 22.09.2014 registered under Sections 420, 406, 494 and 120/B IPC at Police Station City Kapurthala, District Kapurthala and the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise (Annexure P/2) arrived at between the parties. The FIR was got registered by respondent No.2 against the petitioner on the allegations that she got married to Aseem Sardana by concealing the factum of her previous marriage with one Vinod Jain. It was alleged that she got divorced from Vishal Jain on 21.06.2012, while her marriage to Aseem Sardana took place on 13.11.2011. At that time she had claimed herself to be unmarried.

  Report has been received from learned CJM, Kapurthala after statements of the parties were recorded regarding the compromise. Learned CJM has reported that the compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioner is the only accused and respondent no.2 is the only aggrieved person in this FIR.

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 



    

      



!

"#, approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in $





      

"

"

 , the instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof are quashed qua the petitioner.

It is pertinent to mention her that Pooja Bhargave @ Pooja Sardana had also got registered an FIR against her in/laws i.e. mother/in/law Sudha Sardana, father/in/law Varinder Sardana and husband/Aseem Sardana, under Sections 406, 498/A, 354 read with Section 34 IPC wherein also, considering the factum of compromise between the parties, the FIR has been quashed vide separate order of even date.

  Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below.