Criminal Misc. No.M- 30375 of 2017 (OM) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Criminal Misc. No.M- 30375 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : December 21, 2017
Sukhjeet Singh and others …..Petitioners
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Derabassi, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Arora, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 241 dated
Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar and all other consequential proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the
The abovesaid FIR was registered at the instance of respondent
No.2 due to matrimonial discord with her husband i.e., petitioner No.1.
Petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’ – for
short), it is submitted, has been filed. Statements of the parties at first
motion have been recorded. Part of the settled amount has been handed
over to respondent No. 2. The petitioner undertakes to remit the balance
amount on 04.01.2018 at the time of recording of their statements at second
1 of 4
24-12-2017 00:46:48 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 30375 of 2017 (OM) 2
This Court on 28.09.2017 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 28.09.2017, the parties appeared before
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dera Bassi and their statements
were recorded on 03.11.2017. The complainant – respondent No.2 stated
that the matter has been amicably resolved by her with all the petitioners out
of her own free will, without any pressure, undue influence, coercion,
inducement, threat or promise. Pendency of petition under Section 13 B of
the Act is mentioned. It is stated that in respect to the settlement, statements
of the parties were recorded in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as
well. Respondent No.2 stated that she has no objection to the quashing of
the abovesaid FIR qua the petitioners. Statements of the petitioners in
respect to the compromise were also recorded.
As per report dated 03.11.2017 received from the learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dera Bassi, satisfaction is expressed that
compromise between the parties is genuine, voluntary, arrived at out of free
will of the parties, without any coercion, undue influence or pressure. None
of the petitioners is reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of the
2 of 4
24-12-2017 00:46:49 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 30375 of 2017 (OM) 3
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 subject to
strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the settlement by the
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
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. 241 dated
3 of 4
24-12-2017 00:46:49 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 30375 of 2017 (OM) 4
Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar alongwith all consequential proceedings are,
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.
December 21, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
24-12-2017 00:46:49 :::