CRM No.M-116 of 2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 116 of 2017(OM) Date of Decision: March 8 , 2017. Ankit Jain and others ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab and another ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL Present: Mr. Matinder Brar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajpreet Singh Sidhu, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.251 dated
27.06.2015, under Sections 498A/406/506/354/34 IPC, registered at Police
Station Shivaji Colony, Rohtak and all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of a compromise dated 16.07.2016 (Annexure P2)
arrived at between the parties.
The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of an application
submitted by respondent No.2. FIR No.251 dated 27.06.2015 was a fallout of
matrimonial discord between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at
1 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 12-03-2017 03:41:47 :::
CRM No.M-116 of 2017 2
between the parties, the terms of which were reduced in writing on 16.07.2016.
The parties wish to live in peace and harmony and put an end to the acrimony
between them. It is submitted that petition under Section 13B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the parties has been allowed on 24.01.2017.
This Court on 10.01.2017 directed the parties to appear before
learned trial court on 20.02.2017 for getting their statements recorded 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 also
sought as to whether all affected persons are a party to the settlement.
Pursuant to order dated 10.01.2017, the parties appeared before the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rohtak and their statements were
recorded on 20.02.2017. Respondent No.2 i.e., the complainant made a
statement to the effect that a settlement has been arrived at between the parties
on 16.07.2016. The settlement has been arrived at out of her own free will and
consent without any kind of threat or pressure. She stated that petitions filed by
her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as well as under the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 have been withdrawn by her. Divorce by mutual
consent has been granted by the learned District Judge (Family Court), Rohtak
on 24.01.2017. Respondent No.2 has stated that she has no objection to the
quashing of the abovesaid FIR qua all the accused-petitioners. Statement of
petitioner No.1 and joint statement of petitioners No.2 to 4 in respect to the
2 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 12-03-2017 03:41:48 :::
CRM No.M-116 of 2017 3
settlement were recorded.
As per report dated 21.02.2017 received from the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Rohtak it is opined that the compromise arrived at
between the parties is genuine. It has been arrived at between the parties out of
their free will and volition without any coercion or undue influence. None of
the petitioners are reported to be proclaimed offenders neither any such
proceedings are pending against the parties. The statements of the parties have
been appended alongwith the said report.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the
factum of settlement between the parties as well as the facts as narrated above.
It is reiterated that respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the
abovementioned FIR against all the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sajjan
Kumar, 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 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
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of
3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 12-03-2017 03:41:48 :::
CRM No.M-116 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 continuing the present proceedings. It will only lead to
wastage of precious time of the court and would be an exercise in the futility.
This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.251 dated 27.06.2015,
under Sections 498A/406/506/354/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Shivaji
Colony, Rohtak alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.
( LISA GILL ) March 8 , 2017. JUDGE 'om' Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 12-03-2017 03:41:48 :::