JAGDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the First Information Report No. 19 dated 20.3.1991 under sections 326/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Kotkapura, district Faridkot. According to the petitioner he is citizen of U.S.A. and was married to Smt. Beant Kaur respondent No. 2 three years earlier. He came to India to take her alongwith him in March, 1991 but a minor quarrel between him and his wife culminated into the registration of a case against him under sections 326/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Challan was presented in this case on 10.4.1991 and the case was fixed for framing of the charge on 27.7.1991'. The charge was framed on that day and the case was adjourned to 4.9.91 for recording the prosecution evidence. According to the petitioner, he reached at a compromise with his wife Smt. Beant Kaur and he pressed his application filed earlier for grant of Visa to his wife, respondent No.2 and got Visa issued for her on 27.6.1991. A copy of the said Visa granted by American Embassy at New Delhi is annexed as Annexure P2 to the petition. It is then stated by the petitioner that they (both husband and wife) also received their tickets from U.S.A. for going from Delhi to Houston (U.S.A.) for 8.8.91. The petitioner further states in petition that though the parties compromises the matter between themselves and started living peacefully and also made preprations to go abroad, yet the criminal case instituted against him was a great impediment in his and his wife's way towards prosperity.

(2.) NOTICE of this petition were issued to the State of Punjab as well as respondent No. 2, Smt. Beant Kaur, wife of the petitioner. She came present in the Court and has filed a written statement in the Court in which she has stated that she wanted to live a happy married life with the petitioner after forgetting everything which had happened in the past. Moreover, according to her there was no serious dispute between the answering respondent and the petitioner. Everything happened just by chance, and answering respondent does not want to disturb her married life by giving evidence in the criminal case. She also admitted the submission of an affidavit attached in the main petition as Annexure P4 before the trial Court. She has also stated in her reply in para No.4 that the continuation of the proceedings shall be nothing but misuse of the process of Court and deserves to be quashed on the grounds mentioned by the petitioner in his petition. She has also prayed in her reply that the petition filed by the petitioner be allowed on the grounds stated therein. Both the petitioner and the respondent No.2 are present in the Court today and both of them wanted the quashing of the First Information Report No. 19 dated 20.3.1991 as well as the subsequent proceedings thereon. They have compromised the matter and they want to live peacefully thereafter.