Preetam Singh And ORS v. Harminder Kaur And ANR

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 15.02.2017 Preetam Singh and others ....Petitioners

Versus

Harminder Kaur and another ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. B.S. Dhillon, Advocate for respondent No.1.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of complaint No.624 of 2011 dated 12.08.2011, under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 354 IPC added vide order dated 24.02.2012 against respondent No.2, titled as Harminder Kaur Vs. Preetam Singh and others, pending in the Court of Shri Vivek Yadav, Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.)-cum-Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa (Annexure P-1) and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 20.04.2014 and 09.05.2014 (Annexures P-4 and P-5).

Brief facts of the case are that marriage between respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 23.09.2007, as per Sikh Rites

-2and ceremony. The parents of the complainant had given dowry according to their capacity. After some time of the marriage, all the accused in collusion with each other started to maltreat the complainant. 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 petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 dated 20.04.2014 and 09.05.2014 (Annexures P-4 and P-5). During the course of 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 dated 20.04.2014 and 09.05.2014 (Annexures P-4 and P-5), by way of order dated 08.12.2016, by this Court.

In compliance of order dated 08.12.2016 of this Court, the report of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa, dated 03.02.2017 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 petitioners is quashed. Statements of the petitioners 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

-3Kulwinder 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, complaint No.624 of 2011 dated 12.08.2011, under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 354 IPC added vide order dated 24.02.2012 against respondent No.2, titled as Harminder Kaur Vs. Preetam Singh and others, pending in the Court of Shri Vivek Yadav, Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.)-cum-Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise dated 20.04.2014 and 09.05.2014 (Annexures P-4 and P-5). The present petition stands disposed of.

February 15, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No