Skip to content


Present: Mr. Upender Prashar Advocate Vs. State of Haryana and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
AppellantPresent: Mr. Upender Prashar Advocate
RespondentState of Haryana and Another
Excerpt:
.....deswal, dag,haryana for respondent no.1. mr.p.s.sular, advocate for respondent no.2 ****** mahavir s.chauhan, j.(oral) by way of this petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure (for short, ''cr.p.c.”.).petitioners pray that complaint bearing no.99/2 dated 20/23.4.2010 filed by vaishali paul under section 12 of protectioin of women from domestic violence act, 2005 (annexure p1) be quashed. respondents are contesting the petition. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. though it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that they are living separately from the matrimonial family of the complainant since 2010 and have nothing to do with the day to day kant nirmal 2014.01.23 16:53 i am the author of this document high court.....
Judgment:

CRM-M No.9900 of 2012 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M No.9900 of 2012 Date of decision: 21.1.2014 Yash Pal and others ..Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahavir S.

Chauhan Present: Mr.Upender Prashar, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Sagar Deswal, DAG,Haryana for respondent No.1.

Mr.P.S.Sular, Advocate for respondent No.2 ****** Mahavir S.Chauhan, J.(Oral) By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ''Cr.P.C.”

.).petitioners pray that complaint bearing No.99/2 dated 20/23.4.2010 filed by Vaishali Paul under Section 12 of Protectioin of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Annexure P1) be quashed.

Respondents are contesting the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

Though it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that they are living separately from the matrimonial family of the complainant since 2010 and have nothing to do with the day to day Kant Nirmal 2014.01.23 16:53 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M No.9900 of 2012 2 activities in the matrimonial home of the complainant but it comes out from the perusal of the complaint that the complainant has levelled very specific and serious allegations against the petitioners therein to the effect that petitioneRs.along with the husband of the complainant have been humiliating and beating her.

She has been denied medical facilities and maintenance.

She has been deprived of her Istridhan worth ` 3.50 lacs.

She has been thrown out of the house which is owned by the petitioneRs.Petitioner Amit Paul is alleged to have entered the shared household of the complainant and to have damaged the window panes and doors etc.with gas cylinder.

In view of these specific allegations, no case is made out for quashing of the complaint (Annexure P1).Dismissed.

January 21,2014 (MAHAVIR S.CHAUHAN) nk JUDGE Kant Nirmal 2014.01.23 16:53 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh


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