GURPREET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRM-10752-2014 This is an application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer for preponing the date of hearing in CRM-43461-2013 in CRM-M- 38376-2012 and placing on record the order dated 28.02.2014 passed in HMA No.25/11.02.2013 by learned District Judge, Patiala. Heard. The order dated 28.02.2014 passed in HMA No.25/11.02.2013 by learned District Judge, Patiala is taken on record. Disposed of. CRM-43461-2013 This is an application under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by applicant-respondent no.2 (complainant) for recalling the order dated 03.04.2013 passed in CRM-M-38376-2012 by this Court whereby this Court granted pre-arrest bail to nonapplicant/ petitioner in case FIR No.43 dated 16.11.2012, registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC, at Police Station Women, Patiala, in view of compromise effected between the parties.

(2.) It is pleaded in the application that as per the compromise, parties had to make second motion statement in petition under Sec. 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, however, non-applicant, Gurpreet Singh, refused to comply with the terms and conditions of the compromise and in turn put blame on his wife-Jaswinder Kaur i.e. daughter of complainant. It is the case set up by the applicant that nonapplicant entered into compromise just to avoid criminal proceedings and this conduct of the non-applicant has really shocked the applicant and his daughter. Not only this, the aforesaid FIR was quashed in view of order dated 12.08.2013 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-21538-2013 on the basis of alleged compromise. However, the order dated 12.08.2013 was recalled vide order dated 19.11.2013 (Annexure R-4) passed in CRM-42190-2013. Feeling aggrieved, nonapplicant/ petitioner preferred Special Leave petition which has been dismissed by the Honourable Supreme Court vide order dated 10.01.2014 (Annexure R-5). It is further pleaded that non-applicant has obtained the bail in view of compromise and thereafter he has not complied with the terms and conditions of the same. Resultantly, he has played fraud upon the Court as well as daughter of complainant. Hence, this application.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.