The single judge bench of Justice Vivek puri of the Punjab and Haryana High court in the case of Sudesh Saini and another vs state of Punjab and another held that it cannot be said that the power to quash the prosecution is limited only to the matrimonial dispute and that it cannot be used to set aside the order declaring the petitioner to be a proclaimed person; in any case, it must be used to achieve the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the legal process.
BRIEF FACTS
The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioners filed the petition under section 482 crpc to quash the fir under sections 406 and 498 A of the IPC. After that, the party recorded the compromise statement and there is no other criminal case pending against the accused.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the matrimonial dispute has been settled amicably in terms of compromise and the marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under section 13 B of the Hindu marriage act. it was also submitted that the respondent has received Rs 7 Lakhs on account of permanent alimony and the custody will remain with the minor child.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has not disputed the submissions of the petitioner.
COURT’S OBSERVATION
The hon’ble high court stated that is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., so as to secure the ends of justice because the parties have arrived at a Court settlement by way of compromise. The compromise is a genuine one and has been voluntarily executed by the parties without any pressure or undue influence.
It was further stated that it cannot be said that the power to quash the proceedings is limited only to the matrimonial dispute alone and the same cannot be invoked to set aside the order declaring the petitioner to be proclaimed person, in the event, the same is required to be exercised to achieve the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of process of law. It may be true that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings where the offense is heinous in nature, but in the event, the matter is overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly of civil nature and particularly arising out of the matrimonial dispute, it shall be appropriate to quash the FIR. The controversy in the instant case does not indicate that the same involves heinous or serious offenses and furthermore, the matrimonial dispute has been sought to be amicably settled. Consequently, a deserving case is made out where the court should exercise the power to secure the ends of justice. With the amicable settlement effected between the parties, the chances of conviction of the petitioners are remote and minimal.
The hon’ble court relied on judgments titled, Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another.
At last, the court directed to quash the FIR under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
CASE NAME-Sudesh Saini and another vs state of Punjab and another
CITATION-CRM-M-45155-2021
DATED- 18.08.2022
CORUM- Justice Vivek puri
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
