Saturday, May 24, 2014

File 498a etc & when hubby & co run for bail, milk them 8.75 lakhs @ mediation !! Punjab variant


File 498a etc & when hubby & co run for bail, milk them 8.75 lakhs @ mediation !! Punjab variant ; as recent as May 19 2014 !!

******

wife files 498a on hubby and co
hubby, mum etc run for AB
they get interim AB, but sent to mediation BEFORE absolute AB
they are milked 8.75 lakhs !!

*************************************


Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ravisher Singh -- vs State Of Punjab -- on 19 May, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 19.05.2014.

Ravisher Singh --Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab --Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.

Present:- Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, D.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for the complainant.

***

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.J


This order shall dispose of CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (Ravisher Singh Vs. State of Punjab), CRM No. M-33544 of 2013 (Yadwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab) and CRM No. M-33545 of 2013 (Parkash Kaur Vs. State of Punjab) as all these three petitions have been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case F.I.R. No.115 dated 28.8.2013 under sections 498-A, 406, 120-B I.P.C, registered at Police Station, Lambi.

The matter essentially relates to a matrimonial dispute and the F.I.R has been lodged on the statement of complainant Rupinder Kaur. The name of the husband is Ravisher Singh and the other co-accused are Parkash Kaur i.e. mother-in-law and Yadwinder Singh i.e. brother-in-law. On 4.10.2013, while issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this Court in CRM No. M-33544 of 2013 (Yadwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab):-

"The petitioner prays for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No.115 dated 28.08.2013 for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Lambi.

Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the present case has emerged out of marital discord between the complainant and her husband Ravisher Singh, whose marriage took place in October, 2005 and resulted in birth of a child out of wedlock. The complainant has levelled general and vague allegations against the accused and the petitioner is brother of Ravisher Singh. As per allegations in FIR, the complainant started residing separately with her husband in rented accommodation at Bathinda. The petitioner is ready to join investigation subject to terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court.

Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

In the meantime, petitioner is directed to join investigation within five days and on his appearance before the Investigating/Arresting officer, he will be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned officer, subject to the following conditions:-

i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court."

Likewise, while granting ad interim protection, the following order was passed by this Court on 8.10.2013 in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (Ravisher Singh Vs. State of Punjab):-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant were residing in a rented accommodation and all dowry articles are lying there and keys are with the complainant. Only three articles i.e., Motorcycle, Almirah and one Peti are with the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to return those articles also. Learned counsel also submits that minor daughter of petitioner and complainant is with the petitioner and he is ready to settle the dispute keeping in view the interest of the minor child. The interim bail granted by the lower Court has been declined only on the ground that the articles, which are lying with the petitioner, were not identified by the complainant. Petitioner is ready to join investigation and also to return the articles with him. Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

Petitioner as well as complainant are directed to be present before the Court on the next date of hearing. To be heard along with Criminal Misc. No. M- 33544 of 2013.

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

He shall also comply with the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which are as under:-

(i)that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before investigating officer as and when required;

(ii)that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(iii)that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court."

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

Even the mother-in-law namely Parkash Kaur was granted ad interim protection while issuing notice of motion on 4.10.2013 in CRM No M-33545 of 2013 and the notice of motion order reads in the following terms:-

"The petitioner prays for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No.115 dated 28.08.2013 for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Lambi.

"Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the present case has emerged out of marital discord between the complainant and her husband Ravisher Singh, whose marriage took place in October, 2005 and resulted in birth of a child out of wedlock. The complainant has levelled general and vague allegations against the accused and the petitioner is mother of Ravisher Singh. As per allegations in FIR, the complainant started residing separately with her husband in rented accommodation at Bathinda. The petitioner is ready to join investigation subject to terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

In the meantime, petitioner is directed to join investigation within five days and on his appearance before the Investigating/Arresting officer, he will be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned officer, subject to the following conditions:-

i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court."

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

During the course of hearing of these petitions, the parties have been referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the matter has now been amicably settled. Even a report dated 11.4.2014 of the Mediator i.e. Saloni Sharma has been placed on record. A perusal of the same would reveal that the husband and wife have agreed to part ways peacefully. The husband namely Ravisher Singh i.e. petitioner in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs.8.25 lacs to the complainant/wife namely Rupinder Kaur towards permanent alimony/Istridhan and in lieu of other claims for maintenance etc. Such amount of Rs.8.25 lacs is liable to be paid in three installments as per settlement. The first installment is of Rs.1,50,000/-, which has been handed over to the complainant Rupinder Kaur, who is present in the Court. In terms of the settlement the parties are now obligated to file an application under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act to get a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent. At that stage and upon the complainant Rupinder Kaur furnishing her statement before the competent court, she is to be paid a further sum of Rs.4 lacs. Furthermore, F.I.R No.115 dated 28.8.2013 stands registered against the husband Ravisher Singh and his family members under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B I.P.C at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. As per statements the petitioners herein will also file a quashing petition before this Court and in the eventuality of the complainant namely Rupinder Kaur making a statement as regards having no objection for quashing of the F.I.R, afore-noticed, she would be paid the balance sum of Rs.2.75 lacs. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

In the light of the afore-noticed factual matrix, the present petitions are allowed. Orders dated 4.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M- CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (O&M) -6-33544 of 2013, dated 8.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 and order dated 4.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M-33545 of 2013, are made absolute. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

Petitions disposed of.

(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)

JUDGE

May 19, 2014.

lucky



*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family Foundation. SIF is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
 
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

File 498a etc & when hubby & co run for bail, milk them 8.75 lakhs @ mediation !! Punjab variant




Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ravisher Singh -- vs State Of Punjab -- on 19 May, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 19.05.2014.

Ravisher Singh --Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab --Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.

Present:- Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, D.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for the complainant.

***

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.J


This order shall dispose of CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (Ravisher Singh Vs. State of Punjab), CRM No. M-33544 of 2013 (Yadwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab) and CRM No. M-33545 of 2013 (Parkash Kaur Vs. State of Punjab) as all these three petitions have been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case F.I.R. No.115 dated 28.8.2013 under sections 498-A, 406, 120-B I.P.C, registered at Police Station, Lambi.

The matter essentially relates to a matrimonial dispute and the F.I.R has been lodged on the statement of complainant Rupinder Kaur. The name of the husband is Ravisher Singh and the other co-accused are Parkash Kaur i.e. mother-in-law and Yadwinder Singh i.e. brother-in-law. On 4.10.2013, while issuing notice of motion, the following order was passed by this Court in CRM No. M-33544 of 2013 (Yadwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab):-

"The petitioner prays for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No.115 dated 28.08.2013 for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Lambi.

Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the present case has emerged out of marital discord between the complainant and her husband Ravisher Singh, whose marriage took place in October, 2005 and resulted in birth of a child out of wedlock. The complainant has levelled general and vague allegations against the accused and the petitioner is brother of Ravisher Singh. As per allegations in FIR, the complainant started residing separately with her husband in rented accommodation at Bathinda. The petitioner is ready to join investigation subject to terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court.

Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

In the meantime, petitioner is directed to join investigation within five days and on his appearance before the Investigating/Arresting officer, he will be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned officer, subject to the following conditions:-

i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court."
Likewise, while granting ad interim protection, the following order was passed by this Court on 8.10.2013 in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (Ravisher Singh Vs. State of Punjab):-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant were residing in a rented accommodation and all dowry articles are lying there and keys are with the complainant. Only three articles i.e., Motorcycle, Almirah and one Peti are with the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to return those articles also. Learned counsel also submits that minor daughter of petitioner and complainant is with the petitioner and he is ready to settle the dispute keeping in view the interest of the minor child. The interim bail granted by the lower Court has been declined only on the ground that the articles, which are lying with the petitioner, were not identified by the complainant. Petitioner is ready to join investigation and also to return the articles with him. Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

Petitioner as well as complainant are directed to be present before the Court on the next date of hearing. To be heard along with Criminal Misc. No. M- 33544 of 2013.

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. He shall also comply with the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which are as under:-

(i)that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before investigating officer as and when required;

(ii)that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(iii)that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court."

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

Even the mother-in-law namely Parkash Kaur was granted ad interim protection while issuing notice of motion on 4.10.2013 in CRM No M-33545 of 2013 and the notice of motion order reads in the following terms:-

"The petitioner prays for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No.115 dated 28.08.2013 for offence under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Lambi.

"Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the present case has emerged out of marital discord between the complainant and her husband Ravisher Singh, whose marriage took place in October, 2005 and resulted in birth of a child out of wedlock. The complainant has levelled general and vague allegations against the accused and the petitioner is mother of Ravisher Singh. As per allegations in FIR, the complainant started residing separately with her husband in rented accommodation at Bathinda. The petitioner is ready to join investigation subject to terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Notice of motion for 17.01.2014.

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

In the meantime, petitioner is directed to join investigation within five days and on his appearance before the Investigating/Arresting officer, he will be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned officer, subject to the following conditions:-

i) he shall make himself available for

interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court."

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

During the course of hearing of these petitions, the parties have been referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the matter has now been amicably settled. Even a report dated 11.4.2014 of the Mediator i.e. Saloni Sharma has been placed on record. A perusal of the same would reveal that the husband and wife have agreed to part ways peacefully. The husband namely Ravisher Singh i.e. petitioner in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs.8.25 lacs to the complainant/wife namely Rupinder Kaur towards permanent alimony/Istridhan and in lieu of other claims for maintenance etc. Such amount of Rs.8.25 lacs is liable to be paid in three installments as per settlement. The first installment is of Rs.1,50,000/-, which has been handed over to the complainant Rupinder Kaur, who is present in the Court. In terms of the settlement the parties are now obligated to file an application under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act to get a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent. At that stage and upon the complainant Rupinder Kaur furnishing her statement before the competent court, she is to be paid a further sum of Rs.4 lacs. Furthermore, F.I.R No.115 dated 28.8.2013 stands registered against the husband Ravisher Singh and his family members under Sections 498-A, 406, 120-B I.P.C at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. As per statements the petitioners herein will also file a quashing petition before this Court and in the eventuality of the complainant namely Rupinder Kaur making a statement as regards having no objection for quashing of the F.I.R, afore-noticed, she would be paid the balance sum of Rs.2.75 lacs. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

In the light of the afore-noticed factual matrix, the present petitions are allowed. Orders dated 4.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M- CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 (O&M) -6-33544 of 2013, dated 8.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M-33831 of 2013 and order dated 4.10.2013 passed in CRM No. M-33545 of 2013, are made absolute. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/

Petitions disposed of.

(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)

JUDGE

May 19, 2014.

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/



*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family Foundation. SIF is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
 
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/



*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
  
  
regards
  
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist