Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ranjit Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 July, 2022
CRM-M-52101-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(249) CRM-M-52101-2021
Date of Decision:- 07.07.2022
Ranjit Singh and another ...Petitioners
VERSUS
State of Punjab and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Prabhjot Singh Walia, AAG, Punjab
for State-respondent No.1.
Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. M.S.Sachdev, Advocate
for complainant-respondent No.2.
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)
On 15.02.2022, this Court passed the following order in the main
case:-
"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR
No.105 dated 15.08.2007 under Sections 406/498-A of IPC,
1860, registered at Police Station Bhogpur, District
Jalandhar, Annexure P-5, along with all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, and the order dated
10.06.2008, Annexure P-6, passed by JMIC, Jalandhar,
whereby the petitioners have been declared as Proclaimed
Offenders, on the basis of compromise deed dated
09.11.2021, Annexure P-10 and an affidavit dated
23.11.2021, Annexure P-12.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner
No.1 is the husband and petitioner No.2 is the sister-in-law
of the complainant/respondent No.2. He submits that
petitioner No.1 had earlier approached this Court by filing
CRM-M-31977-2012, seeking quashing of the FIR on
merits, which was withdrawn vide order dated 10.10.2012
with liberty to file a fresh one. He submits that marriage of
1 of 5
petitioner No.1 was solemnized with
complainant/respondent No.2 on 23.01.2002, the parties
cohabited together for a few months and a daughter was
born out of the wedlock on 12.11.2003. He submits that due
to temperamental differences, the parties could not get
along and two FIRs were lodged by the
complainant/respondent No.2 including FIR, Annexure P-5.
He submits that the dispute has been settled by virtue of
compromise deed, Annexure P-10, which is supported by an
Affidavit, Annexure P-12, of the complainant and a petition
seeking divorce by mutual consent has been instituted under
Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, wherein the
first motion has been recorded and a sum of Rs.25 lacs
towards part payment of the alimony has been made.
According to the counsel, the balance payment of Rs.25 lacs
is to be made at the time of recording of the statement of the
parties in the present petition. He submits that both the
petitioners were declared as Proclaimed Offenders without
following the procedure prescribed under Section 82 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and no attempt was
made to serve them through the Ministry of External Affairs.
He urges that both of them are abroad and are unable to
return to India due to restrictions on travel due to the
pandemic.
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Prabhjot Singh
Walia, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent
No.1-State. As per instructions received by him from ASI
Talwinder Singh, FIR was registered against 04 accused
including both the petitioners. He submits that accused,
Roshan Lal, was acquitted by the trial court vide judgment
dated 12.08.2013, Annexure P-7, and Mohinder Kaur,
mother-in-law of the complainant was convicted by the
same order, who was later acquitted in appeal. Mr.
Mandeep Singh Sachdev, Advocate accepts notice on behalf
of the complainant/respondent No.2. He admits the factum
of compromise as well as the statement made by counsel for
the petitioners. He submits that the order acquitting mother-
in-law has been challenged by the complainant in CRR-
511-2016, which is pending before this Court and is fixed
for 31.05.2022. He has instructions to submit that the
complainant will be moving an application for withdrawing
the same.
The parties and Investigating Officer are directed
to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court on
23.03.2022 or any date thereafter as fixed by the trial court,
for getting their statements recorded with regard to the
compromise.
2 of 5
The Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court shall submit a report on
or before the next date of hearing specifying the following:-
1. the number of accused arraigned in the FIR and
how many have appeared before it and have made
statements and whether any accused is
absconding/P.O. in the case;
2. the name of the complainant and
injured/aggrieved and whether all of them have
appeared and made their statements in support of the
compromise;
3. the stage of trial/proceedings;
4. if the compromise is genuine, voluntary and out of
free will of the parties.
5. whether any other criminal case is pending
against the accused.
As both the petitioners are abroad, their
statements be recorded through the medium of video
conferencing after they are duly identified by their
respective counsel before the Trial Court. Trial Court shall
make necessary arrangements in this regard.
Report of Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court be
awaited for 20.05.2022.
In the meanwhile, operation of order dated
10.06.2008, Annexure P- 6, shall remain stayed till the next
date of hearing."
Report has been received from the Trial Court in pursuance to
the above reproduced order and its relevant extract is as under:-
"i. That there are four accused namely Ranjit Singh,
Jagdish Kaur, Roshan Lal and Mohinder Kaur arraigned in
the FIR. Accused Mohinder Kaur had been convicted under
Section 406, 498-A IPC and accused Roshan Lal was
acquitted by Ld. Trial Court vide judgment dated
12.08.2013 and was acquitted by the Ld. Appellate Court
vide judgment dated 28.10.2015.
Accused Ranjit and Jagdish Kaur were declared
proclaimed offender, who appeared in the Court on
23.03.2022 though Video Conferencing for getting their
statement recorded.
ii. There is only one complainant namely Sharanjit
Kaur daughter of Late Sh. Kumar Iqbal Singh. She
appeared and made her statement in support of
compromise.
iii. The trial against accused Roshan Lal, Mohinder
Kaur has already been concluded, while accused Ranjit
3 of 5
Singh and Jagdish Kaur. - (sic). Nothing qua any accused is
pending before this Court.
iv. The compromise is voluntarily, genuine and
without any coercion or any undue influence.
v. As per the statement of Ranjit Singh and
Investigating Officer, FIR No.7 dated 26.10.2012 PS Navi
Baradari, Jalandhar was registered against accused Ranjit
Singh and quashing petition is pending in the Hon'ble
Punjab and Haryana High Court."
Counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of
the instant petition, the balance amount of permanent alimony of Rs.25 lacs
has been paid to complainant-respondent No.2 and marriage has been
dissolved by mutual consent vide judgment and decree dated 24.05.2022, a
copy of which has been taken on the record as Mark A.
Heard counsel for the parties.
In so far as impugned order dated 10.06.2008 (Annexure P-6)
declaring both the petitioners as proclaimed offenders is concerned, it
deserves to be noticed that FIR is an outcome of a matrimonial dispute,
which has been settled amicably and the marriage also stands dissolved.
The petitioners were abroad at the time when the FIR was registered and no
material could be brought on the record by the State-respondent No.1 to
show that any effort was made to serve them at their place of residence.
Moreover, the petitioners have appeared before the Trial Court, though
through the medium of video conferencing, for recording their statements,
therefore the objective of Section 82 Cr.P.C., which is to secure the
presence of the accused is served. Furthermore, they have also deposited
cost of Rs.1.30 lacs in compliance of order dated 16.12.2021 passed by this
Court.
4 of 5
Keeping in view the above development, report of the Trial Court
as well as the judgments of the Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others
Versus State of Haryana and another (2003) 2 RCR (Criminal) 888 and
Ramgopal and another Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 (4)
RCR (Criminal) 322, this Court is of the view that both the prayers made in
the petition deserve to be accepted.
Resultantly, petition is allowed. FIR No.105 dated 15.08.2007,
registered for offences under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Bhogpur, District Jalandhar,
Annexure P-5, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom,
as well as order dated 10.06.2008, Annexure P-6, whereby the petitioners
have been declared as Proclaimed Offenders, are quashed.
(SUVIR SEHGAL)
JUDGE
07.07.2022
Kamal
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
