Skip to content


Sunny Mehta Vs. State of Punjab and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Sunny Mehta

Respondent

State of Punjab and Another

Excerpt:


.....started living together. respondent no.2 – complainant also appeared in person with her counsel and filed reply by way of affidavit admitting the factum of compromise and stated they are living together happily and that she is having no objection if the fir and consequential proceedings are quashed. it has also been stated by learned counsel for the parties that all the other legal proceedings pending between the parties have also been withdrawn. in appropriate cases fir can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under section 482 cr.p.c., even if the offences are not compoundable. it was so held by full bench of this court in the case of kulwinder singh v. state of punjab, 2007(3) rcr (crl.) 1052. since the dispute was matrimonial in nature and the same has been settled amicably, in the interest of harmonious relations between the parties, the present petition is allowed and the impugned fir no.115 dated 24.12.2012, under sections 498a/420 ipc, registered at police station mahilpur, district hoshiarpur, annexure p1 alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioner –sunny mehta is, hereby, quashed. ( ram chand gupta ) april 12, 2013. judge ‘om’

Judgment:


CRM not M-11283 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.

Misc.

not M- 11283 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: April 12, 2013.

Sunny Mehta .....PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab and another .....RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.R.K.Trikha, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Deepak Garg, AAG, Punjab.

Mr.Ripudaman Bhatia, Advocate, for respondent no.2-complainant.

***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR no.115 dated 24.12.2012, under Sections 498A/420 IPC, registered at police station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur, Annexure P1, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, Annexure P2, having been entered between the parties.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

CRM not M-11283 o”

2. It has been stated by learned counsel for petitioner that dispute was matrimonial in nature, which has since been settled and that parties have started living together.

Respondent No.2 – complainant also appeared in person with her counsel and filed reply by way of affidavit admitting the factum of compromise and stated they are living together happily and that she is having no objection if the FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed.

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the parties that all the other legal proceedings pending between the parties have also been withdrawn.

In appropriate cases FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable.

It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh v.

State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052.

Since the dispute was matrimonial in nature and the same has been settled amicably, in the interest of harmonious relations between the parties, the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No.115 dated 24.12.2012, under Sections 498A/420 IPC, registered at police station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur, Annexure P1 alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioner –Sunny Mehta is, hereby, quashed.

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 12, 2013.

JUDGE ‘om’


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //