Sumit Gupta And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 10 October, 2017

CRM No.M-12048 of 2017
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 12048 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: October 10 , 2017.

Sumit Gupta and another …… PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Jasjit Virk, Advocat for
Mr. Arjun Veer Sharma, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
*****

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.69 dated

14.08.2015 under Section 498A IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell,

District Amritsar 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 29.03.2017

(Annexure P2).

1 of 4
14-10-2017 23:28:16 :::
CRM No.M-12048 of 2017
-2-

Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 decided to bury the hatchet and

have started living together. It is informed that they are residing at their

matrimonial home alongwith their minor child since April, 2017.

This Court on 24.07.2017 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 24.07.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar and their statements were

recorded on 05.09.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been

amicably resolved by her with both the accused petitioners. The settlement, it is

stated, has been arrived at out of her own free will, without any pressure,

coercion, allurement or threat. It is further stated that she is now residing

peacefully alongwith her husband and does not wish to pursue this matter any

longer. Respondent No.2 stated that she has no objection in case the abovesaid

FIR against the accused petitioners is quashed. Statements of the petitioners in

respect to the settlement were recorded as well.

As per report dated 19.09.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Amritsar, it is opined that settlement between the parties

has been arrived at out of their free will without any kind of coercion. None of

2 of 4
14-10-2017 23:28:17 :::
CRM No.M-12048 of 2017
-3-

the petitioners are reported to be proclaimed offenders. Statements of the parties

are appended alongwith the said report.

Learned counsel appearing 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

against 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

the FIR in question as well as all consequential proceedings 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.

3 of 4
14-10-2017 23:28:17 :::
CRM No.M-12048 of 2017
-4-

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.69 dated 14.08.2015

under Section 498A IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell, District

Amritsar 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

petitioners or it is found that the settlement was a mere ruse to have the aforesaid

FIR quashed.

( LISA GILL )
October 10 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

4 of 4
14-10-2017 23:28:17 :::

Leave a Comment

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