Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33210 (PNJ)

VIPUL GUTPA AND ORS. v. HEENA JAIN

CRM-M/38828/2026 · 2026-07-23

Ramesh Kumari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 202-3 CRM-M-38828-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:23.07.2026 VIPUL GUPTA AND OTHERS ... Petitioners VS HEENA JAIN ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI Present: Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.B.S. Sobti, Advocate (through VC) for the respondent. *** RAMESH KUMARI, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed for quashing of complaint No. 118 dated 03.01.2023 registered on 04.01.2023, under Sections 498-A, 425, 406, 34/120-B of IPC (corresponding Sections 85, 316, 324, 3(5), 61 of BNS), at Police Station Hajipur, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). 2. Mr. B.B.S. Sobti, Advocate has appeared through video conferencing on behalf of the respondent and has filed Power of Attorney, which is taken on record. Upon instructions from the respondent, he submits that respondent is ready and willing to withdraw the complaint on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 09.07.2026 (Annexure P-2). 3. In view of this submission, instant petition has become infructuous. 4. Dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. POOJA SAINI 2026.07.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-38828-2026 (O&M) -2- 5. Respondent shall abide by the undertaking given by her counsel today in this petition. 6. Till the complaint is withdrawn by the respondent, the petitioners shall be represented through their counsel and their personal appearance is exempted before learned trial Court. 23.07.2026 (RAMESH KUMARI) pooja saini JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No POOJA SAINI 2026.07.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment