CRM No.M-18877 of 2017
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M- 18877 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: December 4 , 2017.
Karamjit Singh @ Rinku and others …… PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Sourabh Arora, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Kanchan, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
*****
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.116 dated
07.12.2013 under Sections 498A/406 IPC, registered at Police Station Ghuman,
District Batala 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 21.04.2017
(Annexure P2).
It is informed that exparte divorce was granted in favour of
1 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:15 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017
-2-
petitioner No.1 on 01.08.2015. The complainant/respondent No.2 has agreed not
to challenge the same. The application filed by her for setting aside the exparte
decree has since been withdrawn by her. The entire settled amount, it is
submitted, has been received by respondent No.2. This fact finds mentioned in
order dated 13.10.2017 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in
Cr.MMO No.307 and 308 of 2017. It is submitted that two other FIRs i.e., FIR
No.128/2014 dated 14.07.2014 under Sections 451/323/504/506 IPC, Police
Station Indora, District Kangra and FIR No.313/2015 under Sections 354/506
IPC, Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra as well as consequential proceedings
arising therefrom have since been set aside as the entire dispute has been
compromised between the parties. The parties have agreed that they shall not
proceed against each other in any of the matters.
Photocopy of order dated 13.10.2017 in Crl.MMO No.307 and 308
of 2017 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, produced in Court
today, is taken on record subject to just exceptions.
This Court on 25.05.2017 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 of the parties and to intimate whether any other proceedings
are pending against them. Information was also sought whether all the accused/
petitioners are appearing before the court or are on bail.
Pursuant to order dated 25.05.2017, the parties appeared before the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala and their statements were recorded
on 11.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been amicably
2 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017
-3-
resolved by her with all the accused petitioners. It is stated that the compromise
between the parties is genuine, effected by respondent No.2 voluntarily out of
her own free will without any pressure, force, threat, coercion or undue
influence. Mention has been made of the two FIRs pending at Himachal
Pradesh. Compromise was produced as Ex.C1 before the learned trial court.
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 11.09.2017 received from the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Batala, it is opined that the compromise arrived at
between the parties is genuine and valid, effected out of their free consent
without any pressure, threat, coercion or undue influence from any quarter. None
of the petitioners are reported to be proclaimed offenders. Statements of the
parties are appended alongwith the said report.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the
factual position as aforementioned. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has
withdrawn her application for setting aside the exparte decree for divorce dated
01.08.2015. Moreover, the matters arising out of FIR No.313 of 2015 and FIR
No.128 of 2014 pending between the parties in Himachal Pradesh have also been
settled. It is further submitted that respondent No.2 has received the entire
settled amount and she has no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned
FIR against all 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
3 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017
-4-
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.116 dated 07.12.2013
under Sections 498A/406 IPC, registered at Police Station Ghuman, District
Batala alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.
( LISA GILL )
December 4 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::
