CRM No.M-31580 of 2016 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
Criminal Misc. No. M- 31580 of 2016(OM)
Date of Decision: May 30 , 2017.
Baljinder Singh and another …… PETITIONER(s)
State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mrs. Kuljeet Kaur, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Addl.AG, Punjab.
Mr. R.N.Singal, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.66 dated
Kapurthala City, District Kapurthala and all other consequential proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties.
The abovesaid FIR was registered at the behest of respondent No.2
due to matrimonial discord with her husband i.e., petitioner No.1. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at
between the parties, the terms of which were reduced in writing on 23.05.2014.
The parties wish to live in peace and harmony and put an end to the acrimony
between them. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have decided to bury the
1 of 4
09-06-2017 19:27:58 :::
CRM No.M-31580 of 2016 2
hatchet and live together.
It is informed that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are now
living together in their matrimonial home in a peaceful and harmonious manner.
This Court on 09.02.2017 directed the parties to appear before
learned Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect to the above-
mentioned compromise. Learned Illaqa Magistrate was directed to submit a
report regarding the genuineness of the compromise, as to whether it has been
arrived at out of the free will and volition of the parties without any coercion,
fear or undue influence. Learned Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to intimate
whether any of the petitioners are absconding/ proclaimed offenders and whether
any other case is pending against them. Information was sought as to whether all
affected persons are a party to the settlement.
Pursuant to order dated 09.02.2017, the parties appeared before the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala and their statements were recorded
on 02.03.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been amicably
resolved with all the accused persons. The settlement has been arrived at
without any pressure, coercion or any inducement. Respondent No.2 stated that
she did not want to proceed further with the present case and has no objection to
the quashing of the abovesaid FIR qua the petitioners. Joint statement of the
petitioners was also recorded in respect to the settlement.
As per report dated 10.03.2017 received from the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala it is opined that the compromise between the
parties is voluntary, genuine and arrived at without any threat, coercion or
pressure. Petitioners are not proclaimed offenders neither are any such
proceedings pending against them. The statements of the parties are appended
2 of 4
09-06-2017 19:27:59 :::
CRM No.M-31580 of 2016 3
alongwith the said report.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the
factum of settlement between the parties. It is stated that respondent No.2 is
indeed living together with her husband i.e. petitioner No.1, in her matrimonial
home. It is reiterated that respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of
the abovementioned FIR against both the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sukhdev
Singh, submits that as the abovesaid FIR arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the
State has no objection to the quashing of this FIR on the basis of a settlement
arrived at between the parties.
In Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and
another 2007 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, a five member Bench of this Court has
observed as under:-
“The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of
harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the
power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is used to
enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social
amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of
Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 has observed that it becomes the duty of the Court
to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be
in the interest of justice to quash the abovesaid FIR as no useful purpose would
be served by continuance of the present proceedings. It will only lead to wastage
of precious time of the court and would be an exercise in futility.
This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.66 dated 03.03.2014,
3 of 4
09-06-2017 19:27:59 :::
CRM No.M-31580 of 2016 4
District Kapurthala alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby,
However, liberty is afforded to respondent No.2 to file necessary
application for revival of the proceedings in the above said FIR, in case the terms
and conditions of settlement between the parties are not adhered to by the
petitioner(s) or it is found that the settlement was a mere ruse to have the
aforesaid FIR quashed.
( LISA GILL )
May 30 , 2017. JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
09-06-2017 19:27:59 :::