High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jitender Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 3 August, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jitender Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 3 August, 2009
 CRM No. M-18606 of 2009                                  1



    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
              HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                                  CRM No. M-18606 of 2009 (O&M)
                                  Date of decision: 3.8.2009

Jitender Kumar and others                           ...Petitioners

                              Versus

State of Punjab and another                         ...Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:    Mr. Bhrigu Dutt Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
            Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
            Mr. Narinder Lucky, Advocate, for respondent No.2.


Rajan Gupta, J.

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482

Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.334 dated 31st October, 2006, under

Sections 406, 498-A read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police

Station City Phagwara, District Kapurthala and the subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure

P-1) arrived at between the parties.

Notice of motion to the respondents.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab

(State counsel) accepts notice.

Complainant/respondent No.2 is present in Court. She is

duly identified by her counsel. She has filed an affidavit, which is taken

on record as Mark ‘A’ admitting therein the factum of compromise
CRM No. M-18606 of 2009 2

(Annexure P-1) arrived at between the parties. Three drafts of

Rs.25,000/- each have been handed over to the complainant-respondent

No.2 in Court. The photo copy of the same are taken on record as

Marks ‘B’ ‘C’ & ‘D’. She states that she has no objection if the present

FIR is quashed.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the

fact that the present FIR is regarding a matrimonial dispute, the State

would not stand in the way of quashing of the FIR.

The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the

matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is

likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings.

In view of the above, the present FIR and the consequent

proceedings deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of Full

Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of

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

Resultantly, the present petition is allowed, the FIR and the

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE
August 03, 2009
‘rajpal’