SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Tarun Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 2 May, 2018

CRM No.M-8755 of 2017


Criminal Misc. No. M- 8755 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: May 02 , 2018.

Tarun Kumar and another …… PETITIONER(s)


State of Punjab and another …… RESPONDENT (s)


Present: Mr. Hardeep Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. K.S.Aulakh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Bikram Chaudhary, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.


Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.92 dated 01.09.2016

under Sections 406/498A IPC, registered at Police Station Women Cell, Patiala,

District Patiala 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., petitioner No.1. With the

intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise was arrived at between

the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on 24.11.2016

(Annexure P2). Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 decided to part ways.

1 of 4
13-05-2018 03:30:57 :::
CRM No.M-8755 of 2017

Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 inform that

petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed on

17.07.2017 (Annexure P4). The entire settled amount has since been received by

respondent No.2.

This Court on 11.07.2017 directed the parties to appear before

learned Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements in respect to the above-

mentioned compromise. Learned 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 Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to intimate

whether any of the petitioners are absconding/proclaimed offenders and whether

any other case is pending against them. Information was sought as to whether all

affected persons are a party to the settlement.

Pursuant to order dated 11.07.2017, the parties appeared before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala and their statements were

recorded on 17.07.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that she has compromised the

matter with both the petitioners out of her own free will without any pressure,

threat or coercion and has no objection in case the abovesaid FIR against the

accused petitioners is quashed. Joint statement of the petitioners in respect to the

settlement was recorded as well.

As per report dated 18.07.2017 received from the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Patiala, it is opined that the compromise between the

parties is genuine, arrived at out of the free will and consent of the parties

without any threat or pressure. None of the petitioners are reported to be

2 of 4
13-05-2018 03:30:59 :::
CRM No.M-8755 of 2017

proclaimed offenders or involved in any other criminal case. 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 to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR against the petitioners.

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

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.92 dated 01.09.2016

3 of 4
13-05-2018 03:30:59 :::
CRM No.M-8755 of 2017

under Sections 406/498A IPC, registered at Police Station Women Cell, Patiala,

District Patiala alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby, quashed.

May 02 , 2018. JUDGE

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

4 of 4
13-05-2018 03:30:59 :::

Leave a Reply

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

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