CRM No.M-10330 of 2017 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M- 10330 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: October 7 , 2017.
Robin Dhir …… PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. Vinay Begra, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vishal Satija, Advocate for
Mr. Charanpreet Singh, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
*****
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.138 dated
28.10.2016 under Sections 406/498A IPC registered at Police Station Women,
District Ludhiana 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., the petitioner. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise was arrived at between
the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on 07.03.2017
(Annexure P2). The petitioner and respondent No.2 decided to part ways.
1 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:08 :::
CRM No.M-10330 of 2017 [2]
It is informed that petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 (for short, the ‘HMA’) has been filed by the parties. Their statements
at first motion have been recorded in the said petition and the matter is now
listed for recording of their statements at second motion on 13.10.2017. It is
submitted that the petitioner undertakes to hand over the entire balance amount
in terms of the settlement to respondent No.2 at the time of recording of their
statements at second motion in the petition under HMA.
This Court on 05.07.2017 directed the parties to appear before
learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect 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.
Learned trial court/Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to intimate number of
persons arrayed as accused, stage of trial/proceedings and whether any of the
accused are absconding/ proclaimed offenders. Information was sought as to
whether all affected persons are a party to the settlement.
Pursuant to order dated 05.07.2017, the parties appeared before the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana and their statements were
recorded on 28.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been
compromised by her with the petitioner with the intervention of respectables.
Petition under Section 13B of the HMA has been filed by them. She further
stated that a sum of `3,00,000/- is to be handed over to her by the petitioner at
the time of recording of their statements at second motion in the petition under
the HMA. The compromise, it is stated, has been arrived at out of her own free
will, without any pressure or coercion. Respondent No.2 stated that she has no
2 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:09 :::
CRM No.M-10330 of 2017 [3]
objection in case the abovesaid FIR is quashed against the accused petitioner.
Statement of the petitioner in respect to the settlement was recorded as well.
As per report dated 11.08.2017 received from the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana, it is opined that the compromise between the
parties is genuine, arrived at between them without any pressure or coercion
from any quarter. The petitioner, who is the sole accused in this case, is not
reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of the parties are appended
alongwith the said report.
Learned counsel appearing 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 the petitioner subject to strict adherence to the terms and conditions of
the settlement by the petitioner.
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
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
3 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:09 :::
CRM No.M-10330 of 2017 [4]
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.138 dated 28.10.2016
under Sections 406/498A IPC registered at Police Station Women, District
Ludhiana alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.
However, liberty is afforded to respondent No.2 to file necessary
application for revival of the proceedings in the above said FIR, in case the terms
and conditions of settlement between the parties are not adhered to by the
petitioner or it is found that the settlement was a mere ruse to have the aforesaid
FIR quashed.
( LISA GILL )
October 7 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
09-10-2017 21:48:09 :::
