High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/46622/2016allowed

Hardial Singh & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2017-03-20Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

Crl. Misc. No. M-46622 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-46622 of 2016 Date of decision : 20.03.2017 Hardial Singh and others ....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and ors.

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. D.S. Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Manpreet Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

**** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) Quashing of FIR No. 29 dated 30.01.2013 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station A Division District Amritsar City, is being sought on the basis of compromise deed (P-2) Respondent No. 3 got married to Gurdial Singh on 27.09.2006. Due to temperamental differences, both the parties could not live together as husband and wife. The relationship between them became strained. F.I.R was registered against the petitioners for harassing and humiliating respondent No. 3 on the pretext of bringing insufficient dowry. However, the matter has now been duly compromised, vide compromise deed (P-2) In compliance of order dated 09.01.2017, report dated 27.02.2017 of Judl. Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar has been received in this regard. As per report, statement of parties have been recorded. The GAURAV ARORA 2017.03.21 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Crl. Misc. No. M-46622 of 2016 complainant as well as her daughter stated that the matter stands compromised between the parties and he/complainant does not want to proceed further against the accused and has no objection, if the present F.I.R be quashed against the petitioners. The compromise has been entered voluntarily. To the same effect is the statements given by the petitioners. Consequently, in view of the status report dated 27.02.2017 and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and another 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

Accordingly, FIR No. 29 dated 30.01.2013 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station A Division District Amritsar City, is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners.

The petition stands disposed of.

20.03.2017 (RITU BAHRI) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2017.03.21 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh