Saturday, July 12, 2014

husband abroad since 2008 !! & 498a SETTLED in 2014, for 3.5Lakhs! FIR on inlaws ends in MONEY deal !!



* Since 12.10.2008, the husband of the complainant has never returned.
* The FIR has been lodged against father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as due to temperamental differences between the parties, matrimonial dispute
* .....parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable.  !!!
* offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

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


Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dalip Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 30 May, 2014

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-38999 of 2013

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

Date of decision:30.5.2014

Dalip Singh and others .....Petitioners

v.

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents

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

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present: Mr. K.S. Kahlon, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Deepak Garg, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
Mr. Amit Kaith, Advocate for the complainant- respondent No.2.

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

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.142 dated 10.8.2011 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 22.3.2013 (Annexure-P.3).

The marriage of the complainant Joginder Kaur was solemnized with Mandeep Singh alias Dilbagh Singh son of petitioners No.1 and 2, who is presently living abroad and the present FIR was registered in his absence as he had gone abroad prior to registration of the present case. Since 12.10.2008, the husband of the complainant has never returned. The FIR has been lodged against father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as due to temperamental differences between the parties, matrimonial dispute arose. Now with the intervention of respectable persons of the locality and relatives, the matrimonial dispute has amicably been resolved as the husband and wife have decided to part ways by filing a joint petition seeking divorce and the complainant has settled for an amount of `3.50 Lacs, which is full and final payment in lieu of the permanent alimony. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur has sent his report dated 19.5.2014 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant Joginder Kaur has stated that she has compromised the matter with the petitioners, which is without any pressure, coercion and undue pressure and she has compromised with her sweet will. She has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainant- respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their matrimonial dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, has held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.142 dated 10.8.2011 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

May 30, 2014. (Inderjit Singh) Judge

*hsp*

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