CRM-M-5087-2017 1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-5087-2017
Date of Decision: 08.03.2018

Amit
…Petitioner

Versus
State of Haryana Another

…Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:- Mr. Ranjeet Jaswal, Advocate
for Mr. J.P. Jangu, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. P.P. Chahar, DAG Haryana.

Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate,
for Ms. Reeta Kohli, Sr. Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)

This is a petition that has been filed by the husband under

Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking directions to the Investigating/arresting

Officer to release the petitioner on bail forthwith in the event of his arrest in

case FIR No. 12 dated 12.01.2017 under Sections 409, 494 498A IPC

with additions of Section 376 IPC.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further

contends that in FIR No. 12 dated 12.01.2017 under Sections 406, 494

498A IPC registered at Police Station Civil Line Kaithal, the allegations

made therein could not be borne out.

In brief the facts alleged in the FIR are that the complainant and

the petitioner met in the year 2011 and started living together as husband

1 of 5
18-03-2018 03:24:22 :::
CRM-M-5087-2017 2

and wife out of which relationship a daughter was born on 04.02.2014.

Complainant further alleged that a marriage took place between them under

Nirankari rituals and it is subsequent thereto that the complainant-

respondent No.2 came to know that the petitioner was already married. It

was in that background that the instant FIR came to be registered under

Sections 406, 494 and 498A IPC with additions of Section 376 IPC.

The petitioner herein contends that it was in fact a live-in-

relationship and that there was no valid marriage that was performed.

On the registration of the FIR, petitioner has approached this

Court for grant of anticipatory bail which was, during the pendency of the

instant petition, was referred to the Mediation Conciliation Centre of this

Court and the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably.

As per settlement agreement dated 04.12.2017, it has been

decided by the parties that a sum of Rs. 8 lakh would be paid as full and

final settlement of all disputes inter-se by the petitioner to the complainant

and thereafter the complainant would not claim any other amount from the

first party i.e., petitioner. It was further agreed that the complainant-

respondent No.2 would have no objection whatsoever if FIR No. 12 dated

12.01.2017 under Sections 406, 494 and 498A IPC with additions of

Section 376 IPC is quashed with a further agreement that the parties would

withdraw all complainants whatsoever filed against each other/would not

file any other claim cases against each other/that Rs. 8 lakh in terms of the

said agreement would be over and above the amount paid to her from the

Airforce Authorities till the execution of the compromise.

After the settlement agreement was executed between the

parties before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, a

2 of 5
18-03-2018 03:24:23 :::
CRM-M-5087-2017 3

Criminal Misc. No. 5731 of 2018 has been filed seeking quashing of the

said FIR on the basis of the said settlement. The parties are present in Court

today along with their respective counsels and an affidavit of the petitioner-

Amit in the aforesaid Criminal Misc. NO. 5731 of 2018 has been filed in

Court today which is taken on record as Mark-A. The contents of the said

affidavit are reproduced herein;

“1. That the petitioner filed the above titled petition

before this Hon’ble Court for quashing of FIR No. 12 dated

12.01.2017 under Sections 494, 498A of IPC on the basis

of settlement agreement/compromise dated 04.012.2018

(Annexure P-2).

2. That the above said petition was listed before this

Hon’ble Court on 21.02.2018 and this Hon’ble Court has

directed the petitioner to file an specific affidavit to the

effect that the petitioner shall not claim the custody of the

minor girl born out of the relationship of the parties.

3. That the petitioner submits that he will never claim

the custody of the minor girl in any manner, from the

respondent no.2/complainant in future.

4. That the petitioner has also paid the entire amount of

settlement arrived at between the parties, before the

Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Hon’ble Court.

The receipt of the said settlement amount has also been

admitted by the respondent No.2/complainant before this

Hon’ble Court on the last date hearing i.e. On 21.02.2018.

5. That the petitioner undertakes that he will never

3 of 5
18-03-2018 03:24:23 :::
CRM-M-5087-2017 4

interfere into the life of the respondent no.2/complainant or

the minor daughter in any manner and the petitioner also

prays for the kind indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to

direct the respondent no.2/complainant not to interfere into

the life of the petitioner any more in future in any manner

after the disposal of the present case and all other cases

whichever is pending between the parties.”

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as

perused the settlement agreement arrived at as well as the affidavit. Since

the matter stands settled between the parties as well as a sum of Rs. 8 lakh

has been remitted and received by the complainant-respondent No.2, this

Court deems it appropriate to quash the said FIR, as the compromise

recognizes the fact that all disputes are settled on receipt of that said amount

of Rs. 8 lakh.

However while disposing of the said petition and allowing the

petition for quashing of the FIR it is hereby directed that the petitioner

herein would be bound by the undertaking given in the affidavit that he

would not contact the complainant or the minor daughter; he would have no

access to the minor daughter nor would he claim custody.

Further more since the petitioner himself is denying a valid

marriage between the parties, the complainant is at liberty to remove his

name as father of the minor girl who is going to remain in the sole custody

of the complainant.

Without commenting upon the validity of the marriage the

complainant, she is at liberty to re-marry if she so desires. Needless to say

that the maintenance that had been ordered in Criminal Misc. No. 5087 of

4 of 5
18-03-2018 03:24:23 :::
CRM-M-5087-2017 5

2017 by this Court would come to end as on date and the arrears of

maintenance as awarded by this Court are stated to be clear as on date and

are henceforth stopped.

In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.

12 dated 12.01.2017 under Sections 406, 494, 498A, 376 IPC registered at

Police Station Civil Line Kaithal, (Annexure P-1), and all consequential

proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed on the basis of

compromise qua the present petitioner.

(JAISHREE THAKUR)
08.03.2018 JUDGE
tarun

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether reportable Yes/No

5 of 5
18-03-2018 03:24:23 :::