Criminal Misc. No.M- 17845 of 2017 (OM) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M- 17845 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : October 03, 2017
Davinder Singh …..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. C.S. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
***
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 228 dated
12.09.2013 under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 120B IPC registered at Police
Station Kapurthala City, District Kapurthala 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 – petitioner. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at
between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on
11.02.2017 (Annexure P-2). The present petition has been filed on the basis
of this compromise.
The petitioner and respondent No. 2 have decided to part ways.
Petition under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, it is informed, has
since been allowed. It is submitted that the entire settled amount has been
handed over to respondent No. 2.
This Court on 18.05.2017 directed the parties to appear before
1 of 3
07-10-2017 23:41:15 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 17845 of 2017 (OM) 2
learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements in respect
to the above-mentioned compromise. Learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court
was directed to submit a report regarding the genuineness of the
compromise, as to whether it has been arrived at voluntarily, without any
coercion or undue influence. Learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was also
directed to intimate whether any of the accused are proclaimed offenders.
Information was sought regarding number of persons arrayed as accused.
Pursuant to order dated 18.05.2017, the parties appeared before
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala and their statements were
recorded on 04.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been
amicably resolved by her with the petitioner out of her own free will,
without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Respondent No.2 further
stated that she has no objection to the quashing of the abovesaid FIR qua the
petitioner. Statement of the petitioner in respect to the compromise was
also recorded.
As per report dated 10.07.2017 received from the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala, it is opined that the compromise between
the parties is genuine, arrived at out of their own free will, without any
threat, coercion or pressure. The petitioner is not reported to be a
proclaimed offender. Statements of the parties are appended alongwith the
said report.
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
parties.
In Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and
2 of 3
07-10-2017 23:41:16 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 17845 of 2017 (OM) 3
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. 228 dated
12.09.2013 under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 120B IPC registered at Police
Station Kapurthala City, District Kapurthala 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 petitioner(s) or it is found that the settlement was a mere
ruse to have the aforesaid FIR quashed.
(Lisa Gill)
October 03, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
07-10-2017 23:41:16 :::