Amit Kumar Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1130175
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnFeb-28-2014
AppellantAmit Kumar
RespondentState of Haryana
Excerpt:
crm no.m-24689 of 2013 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm no.m-24689 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision: 28.02.2014 amit kumar ...petitioner versus state of haryana ...respondent coram: hon'ble mr.justice r.p.nagrath present: mr.sandeep gahlawat, advocate for the petitioner mr.anil kumar, dag, haryana for the state. mr.sharad aggarwal, advocate for respondent no.2. r.p.nagrath, j. (oral) the instant petition has been filed for quashing fir no.625 dated 18.7.2011 for offences under sections 498-a, 323, 406, 506 read with section 34 ipc, police station chandni bagh, panipat, district panipat and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of the written compromise arrived at between the parties. report from the matrimonial court has been received after recording the statements of the parties, alongwith original statements. it is reported that compromise is voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. the learned state counsel also kumar suresh 2014.03.01 13:37 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crm no.m-24689 of 2013 2 informs that petitioner is the only accused and fir was registered on the statement of respondent no.2. the decree of divorce by mutual consent under section 13-b of the hindu marriage act has also been granted by the matrimonial court. no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings in this case in view of the compromise arrived at between them. following the principles laid down by the full bench judgement of this court in kulwinder singh and others v. state of punjab and another, 2007 (3) rcr (criminal) 1052 (p&h) and approved by the hon'ble supreme court in gian singh versus state of punjab and others.(2012)10 scc303 this petition is allowed and fir no.625 dated 18.7.2011 for offences under sections 498-a, 323, 406, 506 read with section 34 ipc, police station chandni bagh, panipat, district panipat and the subsequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof, are quashed. needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements. (r.p.nagrath) 28.02.2014 judge sk kumar suresh 2014.03.01 13:37 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Judgment:

CRM No.M-24689 of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-24689 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.02.2014 Amit Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH Present: Mr.Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Anil Kumar, DAG, Haryana for the State.

Mr.Sharad Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

R.P.Nagrath, J.

(Oral) The instant petition has been filed for quashing FIR No.625 dated 18.7.2011 for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 406, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat, District Panipat and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of the written compromise arrived at between the parties.

Report from the Matrimonial Court has been received after recording the statements of the parties, alongwith original statements.

It is reported that compromise is voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

The learned State counsel also Kumar Suresh 2014.03.01 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-24689 of 2013 2 informs that petitioner is the only accused and FIR was registered on the statement of respondent No.2.

The decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act has also been granted by the Matrimonial Court.

No useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings in this case in view of the compromise arrived at between them.

Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgement of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v.

State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (P&H) and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and otheRs.(2012)10 SCC303 this petition is allowed and FIR No.625 dated 18.7.2011 for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 406, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat, District Panipat and the subsequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof, are quashed.

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements.

(R.P.Nagrath) 28.02.2014 Judge sk Kumar Suresh 2014.03.01 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh