Abhinav Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 6 November, 2017

CRM No.M-18523 of 2017
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 18523 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: November 6 , 2017.

Abhinav Sharma …… PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Amit Parashar, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
*****

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.0006 dated

27.01.2016 under Sections 323/34/354A(1)/377/498A/506 IPC registered at

Police Station Women, Bhiwani and all other consequential proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 10.03.2017 (Annexure P2) 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., the petitioner. The matter has

been amicably resolved between the parties before the Mediation and

Conciliation Centre of this Court, the terms of which were reduced into writing

on 10.03.2017 (Annexure P2). The petitioner and respondent No.2 decided to

1 of 4
10-11-2017 23:08:48 :::
CRM No.M-18523 of 2017
-2-

part ways.

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

Act, 1955 has been filed and the same is pending for 08.11.2017 for recording

statements of the parties at second motion. It is submitted that part of the settled

amount has been handed over to respondent No.2. The petitioner undertakes to

hand over the remaining amount to respondent No.2 on 08.11.2017.

This Court on 23.05.2017 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 23.05.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhiwani and their statements were

recorded on 10.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that matter has been amicably

resolved before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. Copy of

the Agreement/Settlement was produced as Ex.C1 before the trial court. It is

further stated that petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

has been filed. Respondent No.2 stated that she has since withdrawn her petition

under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

as well as petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is further stated that she has no

objection in case the abovesaid FIR against the accused petitioner is quashed.

2 of 4
10-11-2017 23:08:49 :::
CRM No.M-18523 of 2017
-3-

Statement of the petitioner in respect to the settlement was recorded as well.

As per report dated 10.07.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Bhiwani, it is opined that the compromise between the

parties is genuine and an outcome of the free consent of both the parties, without

any coercion. The petitioner, who is the sole accused, is not reported to be a

proclaimed offender, neither involved in any other criminal case. 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 against the petitioner

provided there is strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the settlement by

the petitioner.

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

3 of 4
10-11-2017 23:08:49 :::
CRM No.M-18523 of 2017
-4-

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.0006 dated 27.01.2016

under Sections 323/34/354A(1)/377/498A/506 IPC registered at Police Station

Women, Bhiwani 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 )
November 6 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’

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

4 of 4
10-11-2017 23:08:49 :::

Leave a Comment

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