SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sandeep Kumar Kiyat & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 13 February, 2019


Date of decision:13.02.2019.



STATE OF PUNJAB ANR. …. Respondents


Present: Mr. Mahir Sood, Advocate,
for the petitioners.

Mr. Jagmohan Ghumman, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.

Ms. Arti Kaur, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.


Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for

quashing of F.I.R. No.33 dated 13.05.2017 registered under Section 498-A,

406 of IPC at Police Station Sadar Banga, District S.B.S. Nagar (Annexure

P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise dated 16.08.2018 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 25.10.2018 had directed the parties

to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements

recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the

genuineness of the compromise.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before

learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar and got

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 17-02-2019 12:06:43 :::
CRM-M-47046-2018 -2-

their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded,

learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 18.12.2018 to the effect that

the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily, without

any inducement, coercion or pressure.

Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Gurdeep Kaur has

made her statement with regard to compromise before learned Magistrate on

01.11.2018. The same is reproduced as under:-

“I am complainant in the present case bearing FIR
No.33 dated 13.05.2017, u/s 406/498A IPC, PS Sadar Banga. I
have compromised the matter with my own free will and
without any undue influence and coercion. I have willingly
entered into compromise with the petitioners/accused. I admit
the original compromise deed Annexure “A” to be correct and
binding which bears my signature. Copy of my aadhar card is
annexure “B”. I have already filed petition u/s 13 B of Hindu
Marriage Act in the learned Family Court, SBS Nagar which is
pending for 18.02.2019 for final statement. As per the terms of
the compromise, I have received Rs.150000/- through DD
No.962805 dated 31.10.2018 drawn upon PNB, Phagwara,
copy of which is annexure is “C”. I have also received my
entire gold articles from the petitioners/accused and now,
nothing is due from them except Rs.175000/- which shall be
received by me on second motion of petition u/s 13-B of HMA
on 18.02.2019. Accordingly, I have no objection if the FIR
against the petitioners/accused namely Anil Kumar, Sandeep
Kumar Kayat and Kunti Devi in present case is quashed.”

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent

No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to

continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR.

2 of 3
17-02-2019 12:06:43 :::
CRM-M-47046-2018 -3-

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 also in the light of Gold Quest International Private

Limited’s case (supra), this petition is allowed and F.I.R. No.33 dated

13.05.2017 registered under Section 498-A, 406 of IPC at Police Station

Sadar Banga, District S.B.S. Nagar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis

of compromise dated 16.08.2018 (Annexure P-2), however, that would be

subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the High Court

Lawyers Welfare Fund and a receipt thereof shall be produced in the

Registry within 15 days.

February 13, 2019 JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned?Yes/NoWhether reportable?Yes/No

3 of 3
17-02-2019 12:06:43 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 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