SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Hardeep Inder Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 September, 2018

CRM-M No. 46327 of 2017 1


CRM-M No. 46327 of 2017
DATE OF DECISION :- September 10, 2018

Hardeep Inder Singh and others …Petitioners


State of Punjab and others …Respondents


Present:- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Rakeshinder Singh Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Arun Abrol, Advocate for respondents no. 2 and 3.


Petitioners – Hardeep Inder Singh and others have brought the

instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 123 dated

10.7.2017, for offences under Sections 406, 498A, 328, 120-B IPC, registered

at Police Station City Gurdaspur against them, alongwith consequential

proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been

effected between them and complainant Jasbir Singh- arrayed as respondent


It is stated that the F.I.R. is at the state of investigation. The

marriage between Hardeep Inder Singh Cheema and Amandeep Kaur Cheema

was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of

the Hindu Marriage Act on 24.7.2018.

When the petition came up for hearing on 6.12.2017, notice of motion

1 of 3
02-10-2018 09:50:30 :::
CRM-M No. 46327 of 2017 2

was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 – State of Punjab through State

counsel, whereas respondents No.2 and 3 through Mr. Arun Abrol, Advocate

had put in appearance. Then in light of the contention that parties have since

effected compromise, they were directed to put in appearance before the trial

Court to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the trial

Court was directed to send a report to this Court.

Report has been received from Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Gurdaspur, in terms of which complainant-respondent no. 2 Jasbir Singh,

respondent no. 3 Amandeep Kaur Cheema and accused, namely, Hardeep Inder

Singh, Ranjit Singh, Harjit Kaur, Ramandeep Kaur and Kamalpreet Singh

Grewal had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of

which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, with

free will, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Further

complainant has stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is

quashed by this Court. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of

the compromise so arrived at between the parties. It has been reported that no

accused has been declared proclaimed offender in the FIR in question.

Alongwith the report statement of the complainant and all the accused, in

original, have been annexed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel

for respondents no. 2 and 3 and learned State counsel, besides going through

the record.

The dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably,

which appears to have been arrived at between them voluntarily without any

threat or coercion and in terms of ratio of the authority reported as Kulwinder

2 of 3
02-10-2018 09:50:30 :::
CRM-M No. 46327 of 2017 3

Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal)

1052, where in para 28, it has been held 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 Cr.P.C. 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”.”

It has been observed that High Court has power to quash prosecution

in order to achieve ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of law.

Though such powers are unlimited but those are to be exercised sparingly and

with utmost care and caution. Though there is no statutory bar which can effect

the inherent power of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The compromise is in interest of peace and tranquility in the society

and for such like reasons this Court can quash the FIR and ancillary

proceedings exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears to be a fit

case to exercise such powers.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the abovesaid FIR alongwith

ancillary proceedings are hereby quashed.

September 10, 2018

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No

3 of 3
02-10-2018 09:50:30 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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