rajneesh madhok
SPNer
- Jan 1, 2010
- 517
- 490
- 60
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parambir Singh @ Pammi And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 24 January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision : 24.01.2012
Parambir Singh @ Pammi and others
….Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
…Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER ….
Present: Mr.Deepinder Brar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. B.B.S.Teji, Addl.A.G., Haryana
for respondent No.1.
Mr.S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
…..
MAHESH GROVER, J.
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of FIR No.25 dated 21.2.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406, 342, 295-A, 506, 34 IPC, registered at the behest of the complainant-respondent No.2 at Police Station Lambi, District Muktsar.
Originally this petition was filed for quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations set out therein were not sustainable and that the complainant had given an aggravated version of a grievance and given to it a colour of criminality so as to settle scores with the petitioners.
Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M) -2- During the subsistence of these proceedings, the petitioners and the complainant have resolved their differences and have decided to put an end to the entire litigation. Broadly, the terms of the agreement envisage the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce which has since been effected on 28.11.2011 and further as a part of settlement an amount of Rs.82 lacs was agreed to be paid by the petitioners to the complainant. Out of a sum of Rs.82 lacs some amount was already paid to the complainant and the balance amount of Rs.38 lacs has been handed over by way of Cheque No.952392 to the complainant in Court.
Learned counsel for the parties contend that in view of the aforesaid, the FIR deserves to be quashed. The parties are present in Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Both have got their statements recorded separately accepting the factum of compromise and stating that they have no objection if the FIR is quashed. Having regard to the aforesaid facts when the allegations had surfaced on account of a marital discord and also noticing the fact that the parties have since resolved their differences and have nullified their marriage by a decree of divorce and in lieu thereof an amount of Rs.82 lacs has been paid by the petitioners to the complainant on account of permanent alimony, maintenance, etc. and keeping in view the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and others, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, I deem it appropriate to accept the petition and direct that the Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M) -3- FIR in question and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. Ordered accordingly.
Before parting with the order, it is made clear to the petitioners that in case the cheque handed over to the complainant today in Court falters for some reason, it shall be viewed by the Court to be an attempt to obstruct the course of justice and appropriate orders shall be passed upon such a breach being brought to the notice of the Court.
Petition disposed of.
24.01.2012 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE
http://498amisuse.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/82-lakh-paid-for-divorce-and-quashing-498a/
Rajneesh Madhok
Parambir Singh @ Pammi And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 24 January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision : 24.01.2012
Parambir Singh @ Pammi and others
….Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
…Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER ….
Present: Mr.Deepinder Brar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. B.B.S.Teji, Addl.A.G., Haryana
for respondent No.1.
Mr.S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
…..
MAHESH GROVER, J.
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of FIR No.25 dated 21.2.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406, 342, 295-A, 506, 34 IPC, registered at the behest of the complainant-respondent No.2 at Police Station Lambi, District Muktsar.
Originally this petition was filed for quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations set out therein were not sustainable and that the complainant had given an aggravated version of a grievance and given to it a colour of criminality so as to settle scores with the petitioners.
Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M) -2- During the subsistence of these proceedings, the petitioners and the complainant have resolved their differences and have decided to put an end to the entire litigation. Broadly, the terms of the agreement envisage the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce which has since been effected on 28.11.2011 and further as a part of settlement an amount of Rs.82 lacs was agreed to be paid by the petitioners to the complainant. Out of a sum of Rs.82 lacs some amount was already paid to the complainant and the balance amount of Rs.38 lacs has been handed over by way of Cheque No.952392 to the complainant in Court.
Learned counsel for the parties contend that in view of the aforesaid, the FIR deserves to be quashed. The parties are present in Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Both have got their statements recorded separately accepting the factum of compromise and stating that they have no objection if the FIR is quashed. Having regard to the aforesaid facts when the allegations had surfaced on account of a marital discord and also noticing the fact that the parties have since resolved their differences and have nullified their marriage by a decree of divorce and in lieu thereof an amount of Rs.82 lacs has been paid by the petitioners to the complainant on account of permanent alimony, maintenance, etc. and keeping in view the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and others, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, I deem it appropriate to accept the petition and direct that the Crl.Misc.No.M-14727 of 2009 (O&M) -3- FIR in question and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. Ordered accordingly.
Before parting with the order, it is made clear to the petitioners that in case the cheque handed over to the complainant today in Court falters for some reason, it shall be viewed by the Court to be an attempt to obstruct the course of justice and appropriate orders shall be passed upon such a breach being brought to the notice of the Court.
Petition disposed of.
24.01.2012 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE
http://498amisuse.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/82-lakh-paid-for-divorce-and-quashing-498a/
Rajneesh Madhok
