IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Date of decision:01.05.2019
VINOD KUMAR AND ORS … Petitioners
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR …. Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
Present: Ms. Monika Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr.Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.
Respondent No.2 in person.
HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for
quashing of F.I.R. No.104 dated 19.09.2014 registered under Sections
406/Section498-A of IPC at Police Station Women Cell, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1)
and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
compromise dated 27.02.2018 (Annexure P-2).
This Court vide order dated 10.12.2018 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. However, the parties could not appear
before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate and again vide order dated
23.01.2019, parties were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate to get their statements recorded in terms of order dated
1 of 3
12-05-2019 16:14:37 :::
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before
learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana and got their statements
recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has
submitted report dated 11.03.2019 to the effect that the compromise is
genuine and has been effected between the parties without any pressure or
Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Tripta has made her
statement with regard to compromise before learned Magistrate on
28.02.2019. The same is reproduced as under:-
“I have compromised the matter with Vinod Kumar,
Mohan Singh and Sushila Devi in FIR No.104 dated
19.09.2014, U/s 406/498A SectionIPC, PS Women Cell Ludhiana was
registered against the above said accused on my statement.
Now with the intervention of the respectables, compromise was
executed (copy of original compromise already attached with
the quashing petition before Hon’ble High Court). Now nothing
is due against the accused persons. I have no objection if the
above said FIR may be quashed against Vinod Kumar, Mohan
Singh and Sushila Devi. I am giving the statement with my free
consent without any coercion.”
Learned State counsel has 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
2 of 3
12-05-2019 16:14:38 :::
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.104 dated
19.09.2014 registered under Sections 406/Section498-A of IPC at Police Station
Women Cell, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise
dated 27.02.2018 (Annexure P-2).
(HARI PAL VERMA)
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
12-05-2019 16:14:38 :::