Amardeep Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 26 September, 2017

Criminal Misc. No.M- 14283 of 2017 (OM) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M- 14283 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : September 26, 2017

Amardeep Singh and others …..Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another ….Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Dishant Rishi, Advocate for
Mr. Amit Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Gunjeet Brar, Advocate
for respondent No.2.

***

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 332 dated

26.09.2013 under Sections 504, 506, 498A, 406, 34, 120B IPC registered at

Police Station City Dabwali, District Sirsa 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 instance 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 was

arrived at between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing

on 30.03.2017 (Annexure P-2). The present petition has been filed on the

basis of this compromise.

1 of 4
30-09-2017 00:32:22 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 14283 of 2017 (OM) 2

It is informed that petition under Section 13B of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 (for short – ‘the Act’) has been filed by respondent No. 2

and her husband – petitioner No. 1. A sum of `10 lakhs has been handed

over to respondent No. 2 at the time of recording of their statements at first

motion in petition under Section 13B of the Act. Rest of the settled amount

of `10 lakhs has been handed over to Sh. Darshan Singh son of Sh.

Gurbachan Singh and shall be remitted to respondent No. 2 at the time of

recording of statements at second motion in the petition under Sections 13B

of the Act.

This Court on 01.06.2017 directed the parties to appear before

learned trial Court for recording their statements in respect to the above-

mentioned compromise. Learned trial Court 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 trial Court 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 01.06.2017, the parties appeared before

the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dabwali and their

statements were recorded on 31.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that she

has amicably resolved the matter with all the accused persons. The

settlement has been arrived at out of her own free will, without any kind of

pressure. It is stated that the petition under Section 13B of the Act has been

filed. Respondent No.2 stated that she has no objection to the quashing of

the abovesaid FIR qua the petitioners as she does not wish to proceed with

2 of 4
30-09-2017 00:32:24 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 14283 of 2017 (OM) 3

the matter any longer. A joint statement of the petitioners in respect to the

compromise was also recorded.

As per report dated 03.08.2017 received from the learned Sub

Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dabwali, it is opined that the compromise

between the parties is genuine, arrived at voluntary, without any fear or

force. None of the petitioners is reported to be a proclaimed offender.

Statements of the parties are appended alongwith the said report.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the

factum of settlement between the parties. It is reiterated that respondent

No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR provided

strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the settlement by the

petitioners.

Learned counsel for the State 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.

3 of 4
30-09-2017 00:32:24 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 14283 of 2017 (OM) 4

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

merely lead to wastage of precious time of the court and would be an

exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No. 332 dated

26.09.2013 under Sections 504, 506, 498A, 406, 34, 120B IPC registered at

Police Station City Dabwali, District Sirsa alongwith all consequential

proceedings are, hereby, quashed.

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)
September 26, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

4 of 4
30-09-2017 00:32:24 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *