IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2633-2025 Date of Decision:- 07.03.2025 Kapoor Singh Gill @ Kapor Singh Gill ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Amandeep Singh Jawandha, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kewal Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab.

Mr. Monty Goyal, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

****

AMARJOT BHATTI, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner Kapoor Singh Gill @ Kapor Singh Gill has filed petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of impugned order dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby cancelled anticipatory bail granted to petitioner vide order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-5) in FIR No. 0007 dated 18.01.2023 under Section 406, 498- A, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Women District Commissionerate Ludhiana (Annexure P-1).

2. Learned counsel for petitioner raised the argument that respondent No. 2 lodged false FIR against petitioner and his mother.

Matrimonial dispute started between husband and wife and present petitioner had filed petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage on 06.09.2022 (Annexure P-2). Against the aforesaid petition, respondent No. 2 filed a false case as a result, present FIR No. 7 dated 18.01.2023 (Annexure P-1) was registered. In Mediation and Conciliation Centre, matter was compromised vide compromise dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P-4). Thereafter, petitioner and his mother Rajinder Kaur were granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-5). In pursuance of this, matter was put up in Lok Adalat vide order dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P-6) and divorce petition was withdrawn as per order dated 18.03.2023 (Annexure P-7). Despite aforesaid compromise, challan has been presented in aforesaid FIR (Annexure P-8). It is pointed out that respondent No. 2 failed to get FIR quashed in pursuance of compromise. Petitioner has filed petition for quashing of FIR bearing CRM-M No. 61608 of 2024, which is pending for 17.02.2025. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana by passing impugned order dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) cancelled bail order granted in his favour vide order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-5) without considering that there was no violation of terms and conditions of compromise on the part of present petitioner. Since aforesaid FIR was not quashed, therefore, he did not transfer his share in Plot No. 445, Sector 114, Ansal APL Kharar-Landran Road, Mohali. After compromise, present petitioner had gone to Goa on vacation with his family. Photographs are Annexure P-12. Therefore, there was no valid reason for learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana to pass impugned order dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-11) vide which anticipatory bail order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-5) was wrongly cancelled. Therefore, impugned order is liable to be set aside and order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P-5) may kindly be restored.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel representing State as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 2 strongly opposed the present petition taking the stand that it was present petitioner who failed to fulfill the terms and conditions of compromise (Annexure P-4). Neither petitioner transferred his share in plot in favour of respondent No. 2 nor he filed any petition for quashing of FIR No. 7 dated 18.01.2023 (supra) on the basis of compromise. Since, it is the petitioner who changed his mind and violated the terms and conditions of compromise, thus, facts were rightly considered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana and bail granted in favour of petitioner on account of non compliance of terms of compromise, was rightly cancelled.

4. I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. Even during the pendency of present petition, effort was made for reconciliation between the parties and matter was sent to Mediation and Conc