Virendra Chaudhary vs State of Haryana

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2440

AMARJOT BHATTI
Virendra Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Vimal Kumar Gupta, Advocate; For the Petitioners
For the Respondent: Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, Assistant A.G. Haryana.
Dr. Anand Kumar Bishnoi, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2/complainant.

Table of Content
1. details of allegations in the matrimonial dispute. (Para 1 , 3)
2. arguments for and against the quashing of fir. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's analysis of the evidence and decision on allegations. (Para 6)
4. conclusion on the merits of the petition. (Para 7 , 8)

JUDGMENT

Amarjot Bhatti, J. (Oral)

Petitioners - Virendra Chaudhary, Bhagwan Singh, Pushpa Devi, Mayank Singh and Ram Babu Singh have filed the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 18 dated 28.02.2020, registered under Sections 323 , 34, 406, 498-A, 506 of IPC at Police Station Women West, Gurugram, District Gurugram.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners by giving statement in the Court withdrew the present quashing petition qua Virendra Chaudhary - petitioner no. 1.

3. The facts of the case are that Manali Gawer - complainant filed written complaint against her husband Virendra Chaudhary, father-in-law Bhagwan Singh, mother-in-law Pushpa Devi, brother-in-law Mayank Singh and maternal uncle of her husband namely Ram Babu Singh. It is alleged by the complainant that she got married with Virendra Chaudhary on 24.04.2012. Prior to marriage, roka ceremony took place on 12.02.2012. Pre-m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document