Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Narinder Pal Bedi vs Union Territory on 7 April, 2014

Author: Anita Chaudhry

Bench: Anita Chaudhry

                   Crl. Misc. No.M-39373 of 2012 (O&M).                                   1

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                            AT CHANDIGARH

                                                        Crl. Misc. No.M-39373 of 2012
                                                        Date of decision :07.04.2014

                   Narinder Pal Bedi
                                                                            ......Petitioner

                                                     Versus

                   Union Territory, Chandigarh & another
                                                                          ...Respondents


                   CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY


                   Present:       Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate
                                  for the petitioner.

                                  Mr. Gagandeep Singh, appellant
                                  for U.T. Chandigarh.

                                  Mr. S.S. Katnoria, Advocate
                                  for respondent no.2.

                                    ****

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J(ORAL) The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.627 dated 12.11.2008 registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC , Police Station Sector 39-A, Chandigarh and the consequent proceedings arisen out of the same, on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties.

Report has been received from the trial Court after recording statements of the parties on compromise. The trial Court has reported that compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion.

Sunil 2014.04.11 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No.M-39373 of 2012 (O&M). 2

Learned counsel for the State on instructions submits that petitioner is the only accused and respondent no.2 is only the aggrieved person in this FIR.

No useful purpose would be served to keep the FIR pending.

In view of the statements and report of the trial Court and the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, the instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings conducted on the basis thereof for offence under Section 420 IPC (120-B IPC added later on) are quashed.

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




                   07.04.2014                            (ANITA CHAUDHRY)
                   sunil                                      JUDGE




Sunil
2014.04.11 10:10
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document