IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
Date of decision: 13.07.2018
Ram Dhan Sharma and others
State of Punjab and another
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present: Mr.A.D.S. Ghuman, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. V.G. Jauhar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vipin Mahajan, 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 complaint No.
Station Sadar District Gurdaspur, and summoning order dated 30.04.2011
(Annexure P-2) 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 the son
of petitioner No.1 on 26.02.2009 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies at
Gurdaspur. Out of this wedlock one son was born. However, due to
temperamental differences between the husband and wife, matrimonial
dispute arose and the aforesaid complainant was filed by respondent No. 2,
1 of 3
23-07-2018 01:00:08 :::
wherein her husband and other relatives were summoned. 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. Divorce has been granted to respondent No.2 and her husband
Rajesh Sharma under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act by a decree
of divorce dated 17.01.2018.
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 Addl. Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Gujrdaspur, 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.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits at the Bar that in
terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties all proceedings
initiated by the complainant and her family members at Noida and
Allahabad stand withdrawn.
Mr. V.G. Jauhar, Sr. DAG, Punjab, 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
complaint, 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.
2 of 3
23-07-2018 01:00:09 :::
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
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
SCC 466, this petition is allowed, complaint No. 129 dated 08.10.2010
Gurdaspur, and summoning order dated 30.04.2011 (Annexure P-2) and all
subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua the
The petition stands disposed of.
13.07.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR)
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.
Whether reportable No.
3 of 3
23-07-2018 01:00:09 :::