CRM No.M-40777 of 2017
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 40777 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: February 26 , 2018.

Hardeep Singh Gill and others …… PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Munish Gulati, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
*****

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.45 dated 22.05.2016

under Sections 498A/406/506/120B IPC and Section 3 of the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, registered at Police Station

Bajakhana, District Faridkot and all other consequential proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties.

It is submitted that 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, friends and relatives, a compromise

was arrived at between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing

on 21.08.2017 (Annexure P2). Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 decided to

1 of 4
04-03-2018 02:48:24 :::
CRM No.M-40777 of 2017
-2-

part ways. It is submitted that petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 has been filed by petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 and their

statements at first motion have been been recorded in the said proceedings. It is

submitted that a sum of `13,00,000/- out of the total settled amount of

`15,00,000/- has been handed over to respondent No.2. The petitioners undertake

to hand over the balance amount of `2,00,000/- to respondent No.2 at the time of

recording of statements of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 at second motion

on 05.03.2018 in the abovesaid proceedings.

This Court on 31.10.2017 directed the parties to appear before

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

above-mentioned compromise. Liberty was afforded to petitioners No.2 to 6 to

record their statements through their power of attorney holder Hardeep Singh Gill

i.e., petitioner No.1. Learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate 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/Illaqa Magistrate 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 31.10.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Faridkot and their statements were

recorded on 15.11.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that she has compromised the

matter with all the accused petitioners out of her own free will without any

pressure or undue influence. Compromise deed was tendered as Ex.CX.

2 of 4
04-03-2018 02:48:26 :::
CRM No.M-40777 of 2017
-3-

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

abovesaid FIR against all the accused petitioners is quashed. Statement of

petitioner No.1 in respect to the settlement was recorded as well. Statements of

petitioners No.2 to 6 were recorded through their authorised power of attorney

holder i.e., petitioner No.1 in terms of liberty afforded by this Court in this

respect.

As per report dated 24.11.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Faridkot satisfaction is expressed that the compromise

between the parties is genuine, arrived at out of the free will of the parties without

any pressure or coercion. 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

factum of settlement between the parties. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has

no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR against the petitioners

subject to strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the settlement by the

petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterates that all the petitioners

undertake to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived at

between the parties. Petitioners No.2 to 6 undertake to be bound by all acts and

statements on their behalf by their power of attorney holder, petitioner No.1.

Learned counsel for the State has not raised any serious 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

3 of 4
04-03-2018 02:48:26 :::
CRM No.M-40777 of 2017
-4-

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. 45 dated 22.05.2016

under Sections 498A/406/506/120B IPC and Section 3 of the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, registered at Police Station

Bajakhana, District Faridkot 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 )
February 26 , 2018. JUDGE
‘om’

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

4 of 4
04-03-2018 02:48:26 :::