IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA AT
CRM-M-43101 of 2019.
Decided on:- February 14, 2020.
Rajiv Patel and others
State of Haryana and another
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA.
Present:- Ms. Sheenu Sura, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Priyanka Sadar, A.A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate
for respondent No.2-complainant.
HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for
quashing of FIR No.355 dated 04.12.2017 under Sections 498-A, 406, 506
and 313 read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell,
Sector 51, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of settlement agreement by way of joint statement
made by petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 dated 20.05.2019 before
learned Principal District Judge, Family Court, Gurugram in a petition under
Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Annexure P-2).
This Court vide order dated 14.10.2019 had directed the parties
to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their respective
1 of 4
01-03-2020 12:41:06 :::
CRM-M-43101 of 2019 -2-
statements recorded with regard to compromise and the Court was directed to
send its report qua genuineness of the compromise.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties had appeared before
learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram and got their statements
recorded on 25.11.2019. On the basis of the statements so recorded by the
parties, learned Magistrate has submitted the report dated 28.11.2019 to the
effect that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine and
without any undue influence, pressure or coercion.
The FIR in question has been recorded on the basis of statement
of respondent No.2-complainant Neetu Patel. She has already made a
statement before learned Magistrate in support of compromise on 25.11.2019,
which reads as under:
“Stated that a compromise has been arrived at between me
and accused persons and in pursuit thereof, I do not intend to
proceed with the present complaint/FIR and want to get the same
quashed. Now, the matter has been settled amicably. I have no
grievance against accused persons. I request you that FIR
No.0355 dated 04.12.2017 under Section 498A, 406, 506, 34
IPC, PS Women, Gurugram be quashed in the interest of justice.
I affirm that this compromise has been effected voluntarily,
without any coercion or undue influence, with my free will and
volition and without any pressure.”
Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant has not
disputed the factum of compromise between the parties.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Joginder Singh,
has also not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties.
However, she submits that in the aforesaid FIR, the offence under Section 313
2 of 4
01-03-2020 12:41:06 :::
CRM-M-43101 of 2019 -3-
IPC was deleted during the course of investigation and Challan has been
presented in the case and charges are yet to be framed.
In view of the above, continuation of the proceedings before the
trial Court in the instant FIR qua the petitioners shall be an abuse of the
process of law.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gold Quest International Private
Limited Versus State of Tamil Nadu and others 2014 (4) RCR (Criminal)
206 has held that the disputes which are substantially matrimonial in nature,
or the civil property disputes with criminal facets, if the parties have entered
into settlement, and it has become clear that there are no chances of
conviction, there is no illegality in quashing the proceedings under Section
482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 226 of the Constitution.
Thus, following the principles laid down by the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of
Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others
(2012) 10 SCC 303 as well as the law laid down in Gold Quest International
Private Limited’s case (supra), the present petition is allowed and the FIR
No.355 dated 04.12.2017 under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 313 read with
Section 34 IPC (Section 313 IPC deleted later on) registered at Police Station
Women Cell, Sector 51, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of
settlement agreement by way of joint statement made by petitioner No.1 and
respondent No.2 dated 20.05.2019 before learned Principal District Judge,
3 of 4
01-03-2020 12:41:07 :::
CRM-M-43101 of 2019 -4-
Family Court, Gurugram in a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 (Annexure P-2), however, subject to payment of total
costs of Rs.15,000/- to be paid by the petitioners to the Poor Patients’ Welfare
Fund of the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research
(PGIMER), Chandigarh within a period of one month from today.
(HARI PAL VERMA)
February 14, 2020 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No
4 of 4
01-03-2020 12:41:07 :::