Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rakesh Kumar and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another

Rakesh Kumar and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Aug 11, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1161095

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rakesh Kumar and Others

Respondent

State of Punjab and Another

Excerpt

.....and respondent no.2-jyotsna, vide compromise deed dated 14.09.2012 (annexure p-2) before the mediation and conciliation centre of this court. petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are residing together as husband and wife. in compliance with the order dated 21.01.2014 passed by this court, the parties got recorded their statements before the illaqa magistrate. report from the judicial magistrate ist class, bathinda, has been received in this regard. as per report, jyotsna @ priyanka-respondent no.2 made her statement on 09.04.2014 to the effect that the present fir was got registered by her. now with the intervention of the respectable persons, she has compromised the matter with the accused (petitioners).at present, she is residing with rakesh kumar-petitioner no.1. the compromise has been effected without any threat, coercion or pressure. statement of rakesh kumar-petitioner no.1 was also recorded to the same effect. in view of separate statements of the parties, the court is satisfied that the compromise is valid and genuine one. consequently, in view of the status report and the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of madan mohan abbot versus 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.versus state of punjab and another 2007(3) rcr (crl.) 1052, this court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation. accordingly, fir no.12 dated 05.07.2012, under sections 498-a, 406 and 109 ipc, registered at police station mahila bathinda, district bathinda, is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom ajay prasher201408.12 17:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh crl. misc. no.m-1094 of 2014 3 qua the petitioners.the petition stands disposed of accordingly. (ritu bahri) judge1108.2014 ajp ajay prasher201408.12 17:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document.....

Full Judgment

Crl.

Misc.

No.M-1094 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.

Misc.

No.M-1094 of 2014 Date of decision : 11.08.2014 Rakesh Kumar and others ...Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Daljit Singh Virk, AAG, Punjab.

Mr.Arun Abrol, Advocate, for respondent No.2-complainant.

**** RITU BAHRI , J.

Quashing of FIR No.12 dated 05.07.2012, under Sections 498- A, 406 and 109 IPC, registered at Police Station Mahila Bathinda, district Bathinda (Annexure P-1).is sought on the basis of compromise dated 14.09.2012 (Annexure P-2).The F.I.R was registered on the basis of statement made by Jyotsna-respondent No.2 against the accused-petitioneRs.Petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are her husband, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law respectively and petitioner No.4 is husband of petitioner No.3.

It is alleged that marriage of petitioner No.1 was solemnized with the complainant on 01.05.2004.

Soon after the marriage, all the accused-petitioners started harassing, humiliating and maltreating the complainant on account of bringing inadequate dowry.

AJAY PRASHER On this background, the FIR was registered.

2014.08.12 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

No.M-1094 of 2014 2 During the pendency of the trial, the matter has now been resolved between the the petitioners and respondent No.2-Jyotsna, vide compromise deed dated 14.09.2012 (Annexure P-2) before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court.

Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are residing together as husband and wife.

In compliance with the order dated 21.01.2014 passed by this Court, the parties got recorded their statements before the Illaqa Magistrate.

Report from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda, has been received in this regard.

As per report, Jyotsna @ Priyanka-respondent No.2 made her statement on 09.04.2014 to the effect that the present FIR was got registered by her.

Now with the intervention of the respectable persons, she has compromised the matter with the accused (petitioners).At present, she is residing with Rakesh Kumar-petitioner No.1.

The compromise has been effected without any threat, coercion or pressure.

Statement of Rakesh Kumar-petitioner No.1 was also recorded to the same effect.

In view of separate statements of the parties, the court is satisfied that the compromise is valid and genuine one.

Consequently, in view of the status report and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot versus 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.versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.

Accordingly, FIR No.12 dated 05.07.2012, under Sections 498-A, 406 and 109 IPC, registered at Police Station Mahila Bathinda, district Bathinda, is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom AJAY PRASHER201408.12 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl.

Misc.

No.M-1094 of 2014 3 qua the petitioneRs.The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE1108.2014 ajp AJAY PRASHER201408.12 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial