Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinay Bedi vs State Of Punjab And Another on 19 February, 2021
240.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-6088-2020
Date of decision:19.02.2021
VINAY BEDI ... Petitioner
versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
----
Present: Mr. Arpan Sabharwal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harpreet Singh Multani, AAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.1.
Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate,
for respondent No.2.
----
HARI PAL VERMA, J.(Oral)
The matter has been taken up for hearing through video
conferencing due to outbreak of COVID-19.
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for
quashing of F.I.R. No.164 dated 31.12.2016 registered under Sections 406,
498-A of IPC at Police Station Women Cell, Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and
all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise
dated 23.01.2020 (Annexure P-2).
This Court vide order dated 11.02.2020 had directed the parties
to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their statements
recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the
1 of 4
genuineness of the compromise. However, the parties could not appear and
again vide order dated 25.01.2021, parties were directed to get their
statements recorded in terms of order dated 11.02.2020 passed by this Court.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before
learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar and got their statements
recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has
submitted report dated 16.02.2021 to the effect that the compromise has
been effected between the parties voluntarily, without any kind of
pressure,threat or undue influence.
Respondent No.2-complainant, namely, Neha has made her
statement with regard to compromise before learned Magistrate on
12.02.2021. The same is reproduced as under:-
"Stated that I am resident of above said address and an
FIR no.164 dated 31.12.2016 under Section 406, 498-A IPC PS
Women Cell, Jalandhar was registered against the Vinay Bedi
on my statement. The matter has been compromised with the
above said accused Vinay Bedi in the presence of respectables
of the locality on the basis of the said compromise Ex.A1. As
per compromise Ex.A1 today, I have received amount of
Rs.4,12,500/- in cash from Vinay Bedi. I have no objection, if
the above said FIR/case be quashed. The above said
compromise is genuine, voluntarily and without coercion or
undue influence. None of the accused is proclaimed Offender in
this case. I give my statement without any undue influence and
the same is with my free consent. I identify my signatures on the
compromise Ex.A1 at Point A to Point H. Today I have brought
my original Adhar Card and copy of the same is Ex.A2 which is
duly signed by me."
2 of 4
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has been
compromised between the parties and the proceedings under Section 13-B of
Hindu Marriage Act has also been filed in which first motion statement has
been recorded and second motion statement is to be recorded on 22.02.2021.
Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent
No.2 have 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
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 Article 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.164 dated
31.12.2016 registered under Sections 406, 498-A of IPC at Police Station
Women Cell, Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of compromise
dated 23.01.2020 (Annexure P-2), however, that would be subject to
3 of 4
payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the
High Court Bar Association in the Lawyers' Welfare Fund, within one
month from today.
(HARI PAL VERMA)
JUDGE
19.02.2021
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
4 of 4
