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 9]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Veerpal Kaur & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 9 August, 2011

Author: Ajai Lamba

Bench: Ajai Lamba

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.




                         Criminal Misc. No.9025 -M of 2011 (O&M)

                             DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 9, 2011



VEERPAL KAUR & ORS.

                                              ....... PETITIONER(S)

                             VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

                                              .... RESPONDENT(S)



CORAM :    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA



PRESENT: Mr. JS Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
         Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab.
         Mr. RS Sidhu, Advocate, for respondents 2 & 3.


AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

1 This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for quashing of FIR No.102 dated 25.6.2010 under Sections 498-A, 295-A, 323, 120-B, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Moga City, District Moga, on the basis of compromise.

2 In view of the fact that the disputes have been settled by way of compromise, respondent No.2-Bhupinder Singh and respondent No.3-Harjit Kaur have furnished their respective affidavits, sworn on 4.8.2010, which have been placed on record as Annexure P-1 (collectively).

3 Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 has filed affidavits of respondent No.2-Bhupinder Singh and respondent Criminal Misc. No.9025 -M of 2011 (O&M) 2 No.3-Harjit Kaur, sworn on 3.6.2011, today in court, which are taken on record.

4 Respondent No.2-Bhupinder Singh and respondent No.3-Harjit Kaur, as identified by their counsel Shri R.S. Sidhu, Advocate, are present in Court, and state that they are not ready and willing to pursue the litigation, as all the disputes have been settled by way of compromise. The contents of the affidavits, referred to above, have been owned by the said two persons.

5 Since the affected parties are not ready to pursue the litigation, continuance of proceedings shall be an exercise in futility.

6 The petition is, accordingly, allowed. 7 FIR No.102 dated 25.6.2010 under Sections 498-A, 295-A, 323, 120-B, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Moga City, District Moga, and subsequent proceedings, are hereby quashed.

August 9, 2011                                       ( AJAI LAMBA )
Kang                                                         JUDGE


1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?