Vijesh Bhardwaj vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 3 October, 2017

Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : October 03, 2017

Vijesh Bhardwaj …..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ….Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. S.K. Choudhary, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.

None for respondent No.2.

***

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 68 dated

30.07.2013 under Sections 498A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station

Shahpurkandi, District Pathankot 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 – petitioner. With the

intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at

between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on

18.02.2017. The parties decided to bury the hatchet and have started living

together again. The present petition has been filed on the basis of this

compromise.

This Court on 09.03.2017 directed the parties to appear before

1 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:01 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 2

learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect

to the above-mentioned compromise. Learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate

was directed to submit a report regarding the validity or otherwise of the

compromise.

Pursuant to order dated 09.03.2017, the parties appeared before

the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathankot and their statements were

recorded on 21.03.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been

amicably resolved with the petitioner out of her own free will, without any

kind of pressure and coercion. Respondent No. 2 stated that she has started

living with her husband – petitioner. Respondent No.2 further stated that

she has no objection to the quashing of the abovesaid FIR qua the petitioner.

Statement of the petitioner in respect to the compromise was also recorded.

It is stated by the parties that all proceedings initiated by both of them

would be withdrawn.

As per report dated 28.03.2017 received from the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Pathankot, the compromise between the parties is

opined to be genuine, valid, arrived at out of the free will of the parties,

without any kind of coercion and undue influence. The petitioner is not

reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of the parties are appended

alongwith the said report.

This matter was adjourned on 08.05.2017 as it was brought to

the notice of this Court by learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the

petitioner has not withdrawn FAO-M No. 182 of 2016 pending before this

Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that the above said

appeal has been withdrawn on 02.08.2017. Copy of order dated 02.08.2017

2 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 3

produced in Court today is taken on record subject to just exceptions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates that the petitioner and his wife

i.e. respondent No. 2 are living together as on date.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Naresh

Kumar, Police Station Shahpurkandi, District Pathankot, 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

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. 68 dated 30.07.2013

under Sections 498A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station Shahpurkandi,

District Pathankot alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby,

3 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 4

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)
October 03, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

4 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::

Leave a Comment

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