LAWS(P&H)-2013-5-402

RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Decided On May 04, 2013
RAJ KUMAR Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The epitome of the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition and emanating from the record is that, initially in the wake of complaint of complainant-Sapna, daughter of Sukhdev Singh, respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused Raj Kumar son of Amar Nath and others, vide FIR No.55 dated 05.04.2009(Annexure P-1), for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC, by the police of Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar.

(2.) As the petitioner-accused absconded, therefore, he was declared proclaimed offender by the trial Court by way of order dated 03.08.2010(Annexure P-2). However, in pursuance of the trial, his parents Amar Nath and Krishna Rani were acquitted by the trial Court, by virtue of judgment of acquittal dated 22.10.2011(Annexure P-4). Now the parties have amicably settled their disputes by means of compromisedeed dated 11.08.2011(Annexure P-3).

(3.) Having compromised the matter, now the petitioner-accused Raj Kumar has preferred the present petition, to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1), order(Annexure P-2) qua him and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C., inter alia, pleading that now with the intervention of the relatives and respectables of the society, they have amicably settled their matrimonial disputes. They have redressed their grievances. Now they have no grudge against each other. They want to restore harmony between them. The settlement is stated to be in the welfare, benefit and larger interest of the parties. They want to live in peace in future. The complainant does not want to further pursue the matter. She has no objection, if the present criminal case registered against the petitioneraccused, vide impugned FIR(Annexure P-1) is quashed. On the strength of aforesaid grounds, the petitioner-accused sought to quash the impugned FIR(Annexure P-1), order(Annexure P-2) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in the manner depicted hereinabove.