Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Kamboj And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 26 September, 2012
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Ritu Bahri
Crl. Misc. No. M- 8039 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
*****
Crl. Misc. No. M- 8039 of 2012
Date of decision : September 26, 2012
*****
Surinder Kamboj and others
............Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...........Respondents
*****
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
*****
Present: Mr. P.S Jammu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Gagan Mohini, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ajay Kamboj, Advocate for respondent no.2.
*****
RITU BAHRI, J (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 260 dated 12.12.2011 under Sections 498-A, 406 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station City Ferozepur is sought on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
Marriage of respondent no.3 was solemnized with petitioner no.1-Surinder Kamboj on 22.11.2009 at Ferozepur. After marriage they stayed together at Sirsa and thereafter at Mumbai as both were employed in a private firm and were equally qualified i.e M.B.A. Due to some misunderstandings, they could not stay together and an FIR was registered on the statement made by Baldev Singh, father of respondent no.2 with the Crl. Misc. No. M- 8039 of 2012 2 allegation that his daughter was harassed on account of bringing less dowry in the marriage. During the pendency of the investigation, the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The affidavits of Baldev Singh dated 19.3.2012 (Annexure P-2) and his daughter Sarina Kamboj dated 11.2.2012 (Annexure P-3) are on record. Respondent no.2-Baldev Singh has put in appearance and filed affidavit dated 26.9.2012 in the Court today, and admits that compromise has been effected with his consent without any pressure from any side and they are duly signed by the respondents. Now the complainant has no objection if the FIR in question with consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua petitioners. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and 3 has put in appearance and does not dispute the genuineness of compromise between the parties. He has tendered the affidavit dated 26.9.2012 of respondent No. 2 in the Court today to the effect that the matter has been compromised between the parties and now they does not want to proceed further against the petitioners. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are present in the Court and have been duly identified by their counsel.
Consequently, in view of the affidavit dated 26.9.2012 and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and another 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.
Accordingly, FIR No. 260 dated 12.12.2011 under Sections 498- Crl. Misc. No. M- 8039 of 2012 3 A, 406 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station City Ferozepur is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners.
The petition stands disposed of.
September 26, 2012 ( RITU BAHRI ) ritu JUDGE