VIKRAM JAGGI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIKRAM Jaggi -petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No. 232 dated 19.12.2012 (Annexure -P. 1) registered for the offences under Sections 294, 341, 506 and 509 IPC at Police Station Division No. 5, Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure -P. 2).

(2.) THE FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant -Ashok Kumar Arora alleging that his daughter Mukti Arora was previously married to the petitioner. However, there remained some dispute regarding the compatibility and due to which both of them got separated and their marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce on 18.1.2008. The petitioner after getting divorce from complainant's daughter contracted second marriage just after about 15 days, but could not reconcile with the second wife and thereafter again contracted third marriage and out of the aforesaid marriage there was a minor child and despite the fact that the petitioner had already taken divorce from complainant's daughter in the year 2008 and there appeared to be hardly any relation amongst the couple, but in the year 2012, the petitioner again started harassing the daughter of the complainant while giving abusive gestures and illegally trying to interfere in her life and other family members. Now with the intervention of the respectable persons and family friends, the matter has been compromised between the parties and it has been agreed upon by the parties that the petitioner will not create any kind of hindrances in the life of Mukti Arora and her son and further assured that he will not create any complications and on account of the aforesaid settlement, the complainant has agreed for getting the matter resolved and entered into a compromise (Annexure -P. 2).

(3.) LEARNED Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.