SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Deputy Jarnail Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 12 March, 2018

Criminal Misc. No.M- 26105 of 2017 (OM) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M- 26105 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : March 12, 2018

Deputy Jarnail Singh and others …..Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another ….
Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashok S. Chaudhry, Addl. AG, Haryana.

None for respondent No.2.

***
LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 641 dated

15.05.2014 under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 506 IPC registered at

Police Station Panipat city, District Panipat 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 i.e.,

petitioner No.1.

It is informed that petition under Section 13B of Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 has since been allowed in January, 2018. The

entire settled amount has been handed over to respondent No. 2.

This Court on 21.12.2017 directed the parties to appear

1 of 4
18-03-2018 00:37:57 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 26105 of 2017 (OM) 2

before learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their

statements in respect to the above-mentioned compromise. 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 21.12.2017, the parties appeared

before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat and their

statements were recorded on 02.02.2018. Respondent No.2 stated that

the matter has been compromised by her with all the accused persons

out of her own free will, without any kind of fear, pressure or coercion.

She stated that petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and Section 12 of

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act filed by her had

since been withdrawn by her. 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 02.02.2018 received from the learned

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat satisfaction is expressed that

the compromise between the parties is genuine, arrived at out of free

will of the parties, without any threat, fear, inducement and pressure.

2 of 4
18-03-2018 00:37:58 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 26105 of 2017 (OM) 3

None of the petitioners is reported to be a proclaimed offender.

Statements of the parties are appended alongwith the said report.

Mr. Rajesh Malik, Advocate had appeared on behalf of

respondent No. 2 on 21.12.2017 and affirmed that respondent No. 2 has

no objection to the quashing of the above said FIR.

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 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

3 of 4
18-03-2018 00:37:58 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 26105 of 2017 (OM) 4

court and would be an exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No. 641 dated

15.05.2014 under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 506 IPC registered at

Police Station Panipat city, District Panipat 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, any of the facts as mentioned above are not in accordance

with the record.

(Lisa Gill)
March 12, 2018 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

4 of 4
18-03-2018 00:37:58 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation