CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2009) 04 P&H CK 0338

Satvinder Singh and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 21 April 2009

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 362 words

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—The present petition has been filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 106 dated 6.11.2008 registered at Police Station Badhni Kalan u/s 420, 120-B IPC on the basis of compromise Annexure P2.

2.

In the present case, FIR was lodged by Kuldeep Kaur. She had lodged the FIR against petitioner No. 2 Sukhdev Singh alias Sukha her husband, Gurdeep Singh father-in-law, Nachhattar Kaur mother-in-law, Sarabjeet Kaur sister of the husband and against Satvinder Singh and Bhajan Singh mediators. She has stated in the FIR that she was deprived of Rs. 20 lacs, other ornaments, cloths, house-hold articles and Istridhan. It is stated that amount was paid by her father to the accused as she was to be taken to Canada after procuring immigration.

3.

Kuldeep Kaur is present in Court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr.I.S. Mann, and Mr.S.I.S.Brar. Surjit Singh uncle (Chacha) of respondent No. 2 Kuldeep Kaur is also present in Court. They have stated that due to intervention of the Panchayat, the matter has been resolved. Compromise has been annexed as Annexure P2. Reply has also been filed on behalf of Kuldeep Kaur. She has stated that on basis of compromise, the present FIR be quashed.

4.

It is essentially a matrimonial dispute. In the present case husband is a resident of Canada. It is stated that respondent Kuldeep Kaur had to immigrate to Canada after marriage. Sukhdev Singh husband had to facilitate the immigration of wife to Canada. Since the dispute has been resolved, continuation of criminal proceedings will be abuse of process of law.

5.

It has been held by the Hon''ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana 2003(2) RCR (Criminal) 888 and a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that if a matrimonial dispute has been resolved, no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the ratio of law in B.S. Joshi''s case (supra) and Kulwinder Singh''s case (supra), the impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed.

6.

Petition is disposed off.