High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/22309/2019disposed of

Rajiv Bagga v. State Of Punjab

2019-08-20Mr. Justice Hari Pal Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-22309-2019.

Decided on: August 20, 2019.

Rajiv Bagga .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab .. Respondent * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA * * * PRESENT Ms.Samridhi Sareen, Advocate, for Mr.Kanwal S.Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr.Balram Singh, Advocate, for the respondent-complainant.

HARI PAL VERMA , J. (ORAL ) Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.0069 dated 6.4.2019, under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC, registered at Police Station, City, Phagwara.

Vide order dated 16.5.2019, the petitioner and respondent No.2-complainant were directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 8.7.2019. Pursuant thereto, the parties have appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and a settlement agreement dated 12.7.2019, has been entered into between the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that apart from payment of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent-complainant towards litigation expenses, the petitioner has paid another sum of Rs.2 lac to respondent No.2-complainant as against the agreed sum of Rs.5 lac and the remaining amount would be paid to respondent No.2-complainant in terms of settlement agreement entered into between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that in view of the settlement agreement dated 12.7.2019, the petitioner has filed a petition seeking quashing of above said FIR and the same is listed for hearing on 26.11.2019 in which this Court has directed the parties to appear before the Illaqua Magistrate/trial Court to get their statements recorded in respect of the compromise.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as the learned State counsel.

In view of the settlement agreement dated 12.7.2019, arrived at between the parties, this Court finds that arrest of the petitioner is not warranted in this case. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, at this stage, with a direction to respondent No.1 - State that in case the

petitioner is required in the present FIR, in any manner, clear 15 days notice in writing shall be given to him and he would not be arrested before giving such notice.

August 20, 2019.

(HARI PAL VERMA) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No