High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/7442/2017allowed

Denail George And ORS. v. State Of Punjab And ANR.

2017-05-30Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 30.05.2017 Denail George and others ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. A.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Manpreet Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Bhavna Grewal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of complaint No.11/1 dated 11.02.2009, filed under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 506, 511 and 120-B IPC and summoning order dated 09.09.2013 (Annexure P-2), on the basis of settlement agreement/compromise dated 28.05.2016 (Annexure P-3). Brief facts of the case are that marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 21.04.2007, as per Christian rites and Ceremonies. The parents of the complainant had given dowry according to their capacity. After the marriage, the behavior of accused changed and

-2they have started giving beatings to respondent No.2 and taunting her for bringing less dowry. Due to incompatibility of temperament, both the parties could not live together as husband and wife. The relationship between them became strained and the present complaint has been filed 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 settlement agreement/compromise dated 28.05.2016 (Annexure P-3). During 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 settlement agreement/compromise dated 28.05.2016 (Annexure P-3), by way of order dated 06.03.2017, by this Court.

In compliance of order dated 06.03.2017 of this Court, the report of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, dated 24.04.2017 has been received. As per the report, the statements of petitioner Nos.1, 2, 6 and complainant have been recorded and the complainant has no objection, if the present complaint, filed against the petitioners is quashed. 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.

-3Accordingly, complaint No.11/1 dated 11.02.2009, filed under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506, 511 and 120-B IPC; summoning order dated 09.09.2013 (Annexure P-2) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners are hereby quashed on the basis of settlement agreement/compromise dated 28.05.2016 (Annexure P-3). The present petition stands disposed of.

May 30, 2017 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No