Criminal Misc. No. M-10021 of 2017 (OM) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Criminal Misc. No. M-10021 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : September 22, 2017
Manoj Parkhi …..Petitioner
State of U.T. Chandigarh and another ….Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. J.S. Toor, APP, for U.T., Chandigarh.
Ms. Amarjeet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.86 dated
01.10.2016 under Sections 406 and 498A IPC registered at Police Station
Women, Chandigarh 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 behest of respondent
No.2 due to matrimonial discord with her husband – petitioner. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at
between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on
18.03.2016 (Annexure P-2). The present petition has been filed on the basis
of this compromise.
It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that a
petition under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 preferred by the
petitioner and respondent No. 2 has since been allowed on 01.08.2017 and
all claims – past, present and future of respondent No. 2 qua the petitioner,
This Court on 07.04.2017 directed the parties to appear before
learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect
1 of 3
24-09-2017 08:46:56 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-10021 of 2017 (OM) 2
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 07.04.2017, the parties appeared before
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh and their statements
were recorded on 10.04.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that she
compromised the matter with her husband i.e. the petitioner out of her own
free will and volition, without any pressure and coercion. It is stated that a
petition under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce by
mutual consent has been filed by them. Respondent No.2 stated that she has
no objection to the quashing of the abovesaid FIR against the petitioner.
Statement of the petitioner in respect to the compromise was also recorded.
As per report dated 17.04.2017 received from the learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh it is opined that the compromise
between the parties is valid and genuine. Statements of the parties are
appended alongwith the said report. The petitioner is not reported to be a
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the
factum of settlement between the parties. It is reiterated that respondent
No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR against
2 of 3
24-09-2017 08:46:57 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-10021 of 2017 (OM) 3
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
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.86 dated 01.10.2016
under Sections 406 and 498A IPC registered at Police Station Women,
Chandigarh alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.
September 22, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
24-09-2017 08:46:57 :::