SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sudhir Tangri vs State Of Haryana And Another on 15 May, 2018

CRM No.M-3569-2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

265
Criminal Misc. No. M-3569-2018
Date of Decision: May 15, 2018.

SUDHIR TANGRI …… PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR …… RESPONDENTS

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Vikas Bahl, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Davinder Grover, Advocate,
Mr. Sangram S. Saron, Advocate and
Mr. Akshay, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashok S.Chaudhary, Addl.AG, Haryana.

Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
*****
LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.239 dated

17.07.2017 under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 506 read with Section 12 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police

Station Women Cell, Gurugram, alongwith all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of a compromise dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure P-4)

arrived at between the parties.

It is submitted that the abovesaid FIR was registered against the

petitioner at the instance of respondent No. 2 due to matrimonial discord with her

husband-petitioner. It is submitted that no offence punishable under Section 377

1 of 4
20-05-2018 11:35:27 :::
CRM No.M-3569-2018 -2-

of IPC and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act or

any other offence is made out. Moreover, the matter has now been amicably

resolved between the parties. Petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 filed by the petitioner and respondent No. 2 has since been allowed on

27.04.2018. Certified copy of the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2018 filed in

Court today, is taken on record subject to just exceptions. The parties have

complied with the terms and conditions of the settlement. In terms of settlement

dated 22.01.2018, two demand drafts dated 20.04.2018 for a sum of Rs.20 lakhs

drawn on State Bank of India and 09.05.2018 for a sum of Rs. 60 lakhs drawn on

City Bank in favour of respondent No. 2, have been handed over to respondent

No.2, who is present in Court, duly identified by her counsel. Photostat copies of

the said demand drafts are taken on record subject to just exceptions.

Respondent No. 2, present in Court reiterates that in view of the

settlement between the parties she has no objection in case the abovementioned

FIR is quashed against the petitioner. Custody of the children, it is affirmed, shall

be retained by respondent No. 2 with visitation rights afforded to the petitioner in

terms of the compromise.

This Court on 29.01.2018 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

without any coercion, fear or undue influence. Learned trial court/Illaqa

Magistrate was also directed to intimate whether the petitioner is

absconding/proclaimed offender and whether any other case is pending against

2 of 4
20-05-2018 11:35:29 :::
CRM No.M-3569-2018 -3-

him. Information was sought as to whether all affected persons are a party to the

settlement.

Pursuant to order dated 29.01.2018, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram and their statements were

recorded on 20.02.2018. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been

amicably resolved with the petitioner, out of her own free will without any

pressure, coercion or undue influence. It is mentioned that petition under Section

13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by her and her husband-petitioner.

Their statements were recorded on 22.01.2018. Respondent No.2 further stated

that she has no objection in case the abovesaid FIR against the petitioner is

quashed. Statement of the petitioner in respect to the settlement was recorded as

well.

As per report dated 20.02.2018 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugaram, satisfaction is expressed that the compromise

between the parties is genuine and voluntary, arrived at without any force or

coercion. Petitioner is not reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of

the parties are appended alongwith the said report.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the

factum of settlement between the parties. It is reiterated that respondent No.2 has

no objection in case the abovementioned FIR is quashed subject to the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions, 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

3 of 4
20-05-2018 11:35:29 :::
CRM No.M-3569-2018 -4-

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

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.239 dated 17.07.2017

under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 506 read with Section 12 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Women

Cell, Gurugram, alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.

(LISA GILL)
May 15, 2018 JUDGE
jyoti-3

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

4 of 4
20-05-2018 11:35:29 :::

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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