SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Simran Pal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 19 August, 2019

284.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-6996-2019
Date of decision: 19.08.2019

SIMRAN PAL SINGH … Petitioner

versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER …. Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
—-

Present: Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate, for
Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.

Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.

—-

HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)

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

quashing of F.I.R. No.106 dated 19.08.2016 registered under Sections 406,

Section498-A of IPC at Police Station Women Cell, Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and

all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/

petition filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of

marriage by mutual consent, dated 06.08.2018 (Annexure P-2).

This Court vide order dated 14.02.2019 had directed the parties

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

1 of 4
25-08-2019 07:29:22 :::
CRM-M-6996-2019 -2-

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, Jalandhar and got their statements

recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has

submitted report dated 20.07.2019 to the effect that the compromise has

been effected between the parties as per their free will, without any kind of

pressure, threat or undue influence.

Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Parabhjot Kaur @

Richa has made her statement with regard to compromise before learned

Magistrate on 25.02.2019. The same is reproduced as under:-

“Stated that FIR no.106 dated 19.08.2016 u/s 406/498A
SectionIPC P.S. Women Cell Jalandhar was registered at my
complaint against my husband accused Simran Pal Singh.
Compromise has been effected between me and Simran Pal
Singh wherein I have received my full and final maintenance
amount and Istri Dhan. The compromise has been effected with
my free consent without any undue influence. Further my
statement along-with the statement of my husband Simran Pal
Singh has been recorded in the Court of Smt. Preeti Sahani
Principal Judge family Court Jalandhar wherein I have
received a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- in the form of Bank Draft as
such total amount of Rs.5,50,000/- has been received by me and
I have acknowledged the same in the final statement recorded
in petition u/s 13-B HMA. Only my husband was accused in the
present case and no body has been declared PO. I have no
objection if the said FIR is quashed by the Hon’ble High Court.
Copy of my Aadhar Card is Ex.C/A (original seen and return).”

2 of 4
25-08-2019 07:29:22 :::
CRM-M-6996-2019 -3-

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.

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 SectionArticle 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.106 dated

19.08.2016 registered under Sections 406, Section498-A of IPC at Police Station

Women Cell, Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings

arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of

compromise/petition filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act for

dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, dated 06.08.2018 (Annexure

P-2), however, that would be subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to

be deposited with the Poor Patients’ Welfare Fund of the Postgraduate

Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, within

3 of 4
25-08-2019 07:29:22 :::
CRM-M-6996-2019 -4-

one month from today.

However, the parties shall remain bound by the terms of

compromise dated 06.08.2018 (Annexure P-2).

(HARI PAL VERMA)
JUDGE
19.08.2019
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No

4 of 4
25-08-2019 07:29:22 :::

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