SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
RAM NARAIN AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER – Respondent
CRR 106/2011



Crl. Revn No. 106 of 2011 (O&M)

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Revn No. 106 of 2011 (O&M)

Date of decision : 16.07.2012

Ram Narain and others

....Petitioners

versus

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr Jaswant Jain, Advocate

for the petitioners

Mr. Kartar Singh, DAG, Haryana

***

RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)

Challenge is to the order dated 16.11.2010 passed by the

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hissar whereby the petitioners have been

summoned to face the trial.

The marriage of Sushila was solemnized with Ajay Kumar

on 12.11.2005. Out of this wedlock, one issue was born but he died on

21.04.2007 and now there is no surviving child out of this marriage.

They were living separately since 27.01.2007. Due to tempramental

differences, respondent No. 2 has lodged the F.I.R against him on

account of bringing less dowry and harrassment. After investigation,

Crl. Revn No. 106 of 2011 (O&M)

-2-

the challan was presented against Ajay Kumar-husband of the

respondent No. 2. Subsequently, respondent No. 2 filed an application

dated 16.12.2009 inter alia stating that the case was registered on her

statement against Ajay Kumar and the petitioners for causing

harrassment, humiliation and threat to life on the demand of dowry.

During investigation, police has not arrested the petitioners.

Respondent No. 2 appeared as P.W.1 and again named the petitioners

as accused. From the evidence of P.W.1, the petitioners were also

summoned to face the trial.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has tendered the

certified copy of order dated 08.05.2012 whereby petition filed under

Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act by Ajay Kumar and Sushila was

allowed and the marriage between them was ordered to be dissolved

by decree of divorce by mutual consent. They have also given their

joint statement to the effect that Ajay Kumar has paid a sum of

Rs.2,50,000/- to Sushila on account of permanent alimony and now

nothing is due towards either side. It has further been settled between

the parties that all the pending cases between the parties shall be

withdrawn, in view of this settlement.

After going through the certified copy of order dated

08.05.2012, it transpires that parties have settled their dispute and the

Crl. Revn No. 106 of 2011 (O&M)

-3-

complainant has been compensated fairly.

In view of the above, order dated 16.11.2010 passed by the

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hissar is set aside along with all

consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

16.07.2012

(RITU BAHRI)

G.Arora

JUDGE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top