SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dhanna Ram vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 18 January, 2018

CRM No.M-13288 of 2017


Criminal Misc. No. M- 13288 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: January 18 , 2018.

Dhanna Ram and another …… PETITIONER(s)


State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)


Present: Mr. Gourav Goel, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Puneet Singla, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.


Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.04 dated

05.01.2017 under Sections 323/498A/506/34 IPC, registered at Police Station

Division No.2, Ludhiana 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. With the

intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise was arrived at between

the parties. Respondent No.2, it is submitted, has no objection to the quashing of

the aforementioned FIR (Annexure P2). It is stated that petitioner No.1 and

1 of 4
26-01-2018 17:20:15 :::
CRM No.M-13288 of 2017

respondent No.2 have resumed matrimonial ties and are living together in peace

and harmony.

This Court on 08.08.2017 directed the parties to appear before

learned Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect to the above-

mentioned compromise. Learned 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 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 08.08.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana and their statements were

recorded on 05.09.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been

amicably resolved between the parties pursuant to which she is living with her

husband, petitioner No.1 and she does not wish to pursue the proceedings arising

out of the aforementioned FIR. Respondent No.2 stated that she has no objection

in case the abovesaid FIR against the accused petitioners is quashed. Joint

statement of the petitioners in respect to the settlement was recorded as well.

Report dated 19.09.2017 has been received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana. After noting the contents of the statements of

the parties, it is observed that a settlement between the parties has been arrived

at. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are noted to be living together. None of

the petitioners are reported to be proclaimed offenders. Statements of the parties

are appended alongwith the said report.

2 of 4
26-01-2018 17:20:16 :::
CRM No.M-13288 of 2017

Respondent No.2, duly identified by her counsel, is present in Court.

She reaffirms and verifies the factum of settlement between the parties and

reiterates that she has no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR

against the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sunil

Kumar, submits that as the abovesaid FIR arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the

State has no 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


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 court and would be an exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.04 dated 05.01.2017

under Sections 323/498A/506/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.2,

3 of 4
26-01-2018 17:20:16 :::
CRM No.M-13288 of 2017

Ludhiana 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.

January 18 , 2018. JUDGE

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

4 of 4
26-01-2018 17:20:16 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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