SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Karamjit Singh @ Rinku And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 4 December, 2017

CRM No.M-18877 of 2017


Criminal Misc. No. M- 18877 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: December 4 , 2017.

Karamjit Singh @ Rinku and others …… PETITIONER(s)


State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)


Present: Mr. Sourabh Arora, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

Ms. Kanchan, Advocate
for respondent No.2.


Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.116 dated

07.12.2013 under Sections 498A/406 IPC, registered at Police Station Ghuman,

District Batala 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, the terms of which were reduced into writing on 21.04.2017

(Annexure P2).

It is informed that exparte divorce was granted in favour of

1 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:15 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017

petitioner No.1 on 01.08.2015. The complainant/respondent No.2 has agreed not

to challenge the same. The application filed by her for setting aside the exparte

decree has since been withdrawn by her. The entire settled amount, it is

submitted, has been received by respondent No.2. This fact finds mentioned in

order dated 13.10.2017 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in

Cr.MMO No.307 and 308 of 2017. It is submitted that two other FIRs i.e., FIR

No.128/2014 dated 14.07.2014 under Sections 451/323/504/506 IPC, Police

Station Indora, District Kangra and FIR No.313/2015 under Sections 354/506

IPC, Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra as well as consequential proceedings

arising therefrom have since been set aside as the entire dispute has been

compromised between the parties. The parties have agreed that they shall not

proceed against each other in any of the matters.

Photocopy of order dated 13.10.2017 in Crl.MMO No.307 and 308

of 2017 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, produced in Court

today, is taken on record subject to just exceptions.

This Court on 25.05.2017 directed the parties to appear before

learned trial court for recording their statements in respect to the above-

mentioned compromise. Learned trial court 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 of the parties and to intimate whether any other proceedings

are pending against them. Information was also sought whether all the accused/

petitioners are appearing before the court or are on bail.

Pursuant to order dated 25.05.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala and their statements were recorded

on 11.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been amicably

2 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017

resolved by her with all the accused petitioners. It is stated that the compromise

between the parties is genuine, effected by respondent No.2 voluntarily out of

her own free will without any pressure, force, threat, coercion or undue

influence. Mention has been made of the two FIRs pending at Himachal

Pradesh. Compromise was produced as Ex.C1 before the learned trial court.

Respondent No.2 stated that she has no objection in case the abovesaid FIR

against the accused petitioners is quashed. Statements of the petitioners in

respect to the settlement were recorded as well.

As per report dated 11.09.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Batala, it is opined that the compromise arrived at

between the parties is genuine and valid, effected out of their free consent

without any pressure, threat, coercion or undue influence from any quarter. None

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

parties are appended alongwith the said report.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the

factual position as aforementioned. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has

withdrawn her application for setting aside the exparte decree for divorce dated

01.08.2015. Moreover, the matters arising out of FIR No.313 of 2015 and FIR

No.128 of 2014 pending between the parties in Himachal Pradesh have also been

settled. It is further submitted that respondent No.2 has received the entire

settled amount and she has no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned

FIR against all the petitioners.

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

the FIR in question as well as all consequential proceedings on the basis of a

3 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::
CRM No.M-18877 of 2017

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 court and would be an exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No.116 dated 07.12.2013

under Sections 498A/406 IPC, registered at Police Station Ghuman, District

Batala alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.

December 4 , 2017. JUDGE

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

4 of 4
09-12-2017 06:22:16 :::

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