Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : October 03, 2017
Vijesh Bhardwaj …..Petitioner
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. S.K. Choudhary, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Rahul Rathore, DAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
LISA GILL, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 68 dated
30.07.2013 under Sections 498A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station
Shahpurkandi, District Pathankot and all other consequential proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the
The abovesaid FIR was registered at the instance of respondent
No.2 due to matrimonial discord with her husband – petitioner. With the
intervention of respectables and relatives, a compromise has been arrived at
between the parties, the terms of which were reduced into writing on
18.02.2017. The parties decided to bury the hatchet and have started living
together again. The present petition has been filed on the basis of this
This Court on 09.03.2017 directed the parties to appear before
1 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:01 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 2
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 validity or otherwise of the
Pursuant to order dated 09.03.2017, the parties appeared before
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathankot and their statements were
recorded on 21.03.2017. Respondent No.2 stated that the matter has been
amicably resolved with the petitioner out of her own free will, without any
kind of pressure and coercion. Respondent No. 2 stated that she has started
living with her husband – petitioner. Respondent No.2 further stated that
she has no objection to the quashing of the abovesaid FIR qua the petitioner.
Statement of the petitioner in respect to the compromise was also recorded.
It is stated by the parties that all proceedings initiated by both of them
would be withdrawn.
As per report dated 28.03.2017 received from the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Pathankot, the compromise between the parties is
opined to be genuine, valid, arrived at out of the free will of the parties,
without any kind of coercion and undue influence. The petitioner is not
reported to be a proclaimed offender. Statements of the parties are appended
alongwith the said report.
This matter was adjourned on 08.05.2017 as it was brought to
the notice of this Court by learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the
petitioner has not withdrawn FAO-M No. 182 of 2016 pending before this
Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that the above said
appeal has been withdrawn on 02.08.2017. Copy of order dated 02.08.2017
2 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 3
produced in Court today is taken on record subject to just exceptions.
Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates that the petitioner and his wife
i.e. respondent No. 2 are living together as on date.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Naresh
Kumar, Police Station Shahpurkandi, District Pathankot, submits that as the
abovesaid FIR arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the State has no
objection to the quashing of this FIR 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. 68 dated 30.07.2013
under Sections 498A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station Shahpurkandi,
District Pathankot alongwith all consequential proceedings are, hereby,
3 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::
Criminal Misc. No.M- 7993 of 2017 (OM) 4
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(s) or it is found that the settlement was a mere
ruse to have the aforesaid FIR quashed.
October 03, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
08-10-2017 00:22:03 :::