Punjab-Haryana High Court
Madhu Bala vs State Of Punjab And Others on 18 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:052905
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:052905
266-2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 23461 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 18.04.2024
Madhu Bala
.......... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Pushpinder Kaushal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Siddharath Sandhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
for respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
Mr. Rajender Kumar, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 3 & 4.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner, by way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeks quashing of Kalandra dated 15.09.2020 (Annexure P-5) under Section 182 of IPC; summoning order dated 24.09.2020 (Annexure P-
6) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 07.02.2023 (Annexre P-8) arrived at between the parties. [2] Allegations are that the petitioner made a false complaint dated 25.06.2020 against her husband-Gurwinder Singh (respondent No. 3); consequently, Kalandra vide DDR No. 15, dated 15.09.2020, under Section 182 IPC was presented against her, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, SAS Nagar, and the petitioner was summoned vide order dated 24.09.2020 (P-6).
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 23-04-2024 00:38:54 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:052905 CRM-M No. 23461 of 2023 (O&M) -2- [3] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband-respondent No. 3 has been settled, while dissolving their marriage by mutual consent vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2023 passed by the learned Family Court, Chandigarh. He further submits that with the intervention of respectables and family members, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties vide compromise dated 07.02.2023 (P-8); thus, the proceedings against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC are liable to be quashed. [4] Learned State Counsel opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
[5] Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 & 4, on instructions, admits the factum of compromise and has no objection if the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC are quashed. [6] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book.
[7] A perusal of the record shows that the marriage between the petitioner and her husband-respondent No. 3 has been dissolved by way of mutual consent under Section 13-B of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Family Court), Chandigarh and the parties have settled their dispute amicably by writing a deed of compromise dated 07.02.2023 (P-8). Keeping in view the fact that the proceedings under Section 182 IPC arisen on account of matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband- Gurwinder Singh (respondent No. 3) and the fact that now the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute, it would be just and expedient to 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 23-04-2024 00:38:55 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:052905 CRM-M No. 23461 of 2023 (O&M) -3- quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC as continuation of the said proceedings would not serve any useful purpose. [8] Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The DDR No. 15 dated 15.09.2020 (Kalandra) under Section 182 IPC, registered at Police Station Phase-1, Mohali and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner.
[9] The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services Authority concerned within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
April 18, 2024 ( HARKESH MANUJA )
'dk kamra' JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 23-04-2024 00:38:55 :::