High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/4053/2017allowed

Jitin Kumar v. State Of Punjab And ANR.

2017-05-24Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

CRM-M-4053-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-4053-2017 Date of Decision:- 24.05.2017 Jitin Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. K.S. Manraj, Advocate for Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Manpreet Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sarvesh Malik, Advocate for respondent No.2.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.30 dated 19.03.2016, under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Women Cell, Patiala, on the basis of compromise deed dated 10.01.2017 (Annexure P-2). Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 19.04.2014, as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. Out of the said wedlock, no child was born out. Due to incompatibility of temperament, both the parties could not live together as husband and wife. The relationship between them became strained and thereafter, the F.I.R was registered against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the peace and harmony, the matter has now been amicably settled between the parties with the intervention of respectable persons, vide compromise deed dated 10.01.2017 (Annexure P-2)..

Naresh Kumar 2017.06.01 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-4053-2017 -2During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court, was directed to record the statements of all the concerned parties, with regard to the genuineness and validity or otherwise of the compromise deed dated 10.01.2017 (Annexure P-2), by way of order dated 08.02.2017, by this Court.

In compliance of order dated 08.02.2017 of this Court, the report of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patiala dated 04.05.2017 has been received. As per the report, the statements of all the concerned parties have been recorded and the complainant has no objection, if the present FIR registered against the petitioner is quashed. Statements of the petitioner and complainant have been recorded to the same effect. Consequently, in view of the above-said report and in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910; Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

Accordingly, FIR No.30 dated 19.03.2016, under Sections 498A and 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Women Cell, Patiala and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise deed dated 10.01.2017 (Annexure P-2). The present petition stands disposed of.

May 24, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Naresh Kumar 2017.06.01 11:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh