IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-22498-2018
Date of decision: 18.07.2018
Gurdeep Singh and others
…Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present: Mr. Mohd. Arshad, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.
Ms. Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate, with
Ms. Prabha Sharma, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.
****
JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 45
dated 25.03.2014 under Sections 498A/ 406 / 323 / 506 IPC registered at
Police Station Panjokhra (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise entered into between the
parties.
The marriage of respondent No.2 was solemnized with
petitioner No.1 on 22.11.2009 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies. Out
of this wedlock one son, namely Agam Singh, was born. However, due to
temperamental differences between the husband and wife, matrimonial
dispute arose and the aforesaid FIR was lodged by respondent No.2.
1 of 3
22-07-2018 01:13:04 :::
CRM-M-22498-2018 -2-
However, now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matrimonial
dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and they have entered
into a compromise. A divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu
Marriage Act with mutual consent has been filed.
Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a
compromise, they were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate for
getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In
pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from the Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Ambala, stating that the compromise arrived at
between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and
the same appears to be genuine one.
Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, learned AAG, Haryana on instructions
from the Investigating Officer, and learned counsel for respondent No.2
admit to the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have
indeed settled their dispute, they would have no objection to the quashing of
the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and gone
through the record.
In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a
loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between
the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After
considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that
both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal
prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate
2 of 3
22-07-2018 01:13:05 :::
CRM-M-22498-2018 -3-
conviction are bleak.
Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been
amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Narinder Singh others vs. State of Punjab another, (2014) 6
SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 45 dated 25.03.2014 under
Sections 498A/ 406 / 323 / 506 IPC registered at Police Station Panjokhra
(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are
quashed qua the petitioners.
The petition stands disposed of.
18.07.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR)
Satyawan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.
Whether reportable No.
3 of 3
22-07-2018 01:13:05 :::
