Punjab-Haryana High Court
Varun Sharma And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 8 July, 2022
CRM-M-10499-2021 -1-
234 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-10499-2021
Date of Decision: 08.07.2022
VARUN SHARMA AND OTHERS ... PETITIONERS
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI
Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Ishneet Kaur, AAG Punjab.
Mr. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.2.
***
VIVEK PURI, J. (ORAL)
Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of
FIR No. 174 dated 05.09.2020 registered under Sections 498-A, 406 of the
Indian Penal Code at Police Station City Gurdaspur and all the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise
(Annexure P-1).
On 05.03.2021, the parties were directed to appear before the
Trial Court and get their statements recorded with regard to the compromise
arrived at between them. The Trial Court was directed to record the
statements of all the concerned and sent its report regarding genuineness of
the compromise.
In compliance of the order dated 05.03.2021 , learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur has recorded the statements of the parties
and submitted the report, the relevant para whereof reads as under:-
1 of 3
" It is submitted that from the statements of
the parties, it appears that the compromise is
genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or
undue influence. There are three accused persons
namely Varun Sharma, Subhash Kumar alias
Subhash Sharma and Kamla Devi in the present FIR
case. No other criminal case is pending against the
petitioners/accused. No person has been get declared
as proclaimed offender in the present case."
Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that matrimonial
dispute has been amicably settled in terms of the compromise deed dated
12.02.2021. The marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No. 2 has been
dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act in terms of the judgment and decree passed by the
Family Court, Gurdaspur. The custody of the minor daughter shall remain
with petitioner No.1. A sum of Rs. 8.5 Lakhs has been paid to respondent
No.2 in full and final settlement of her claim for permanent alimony. No
other case is pending between the parties.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has acknowledged this
fact and has stated that he has no objection if the aforementioned FIR is
quashed.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through
the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it 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 settlement, out of the Court, by way of compromise (Annexure P-1).
The compromise is without any pressure and is a genuine one. In such a
situation, continuation of the prosecution would result in sheer abuse of
process of law.
2 of 3
The controversy in the instant case does not indicate that the
same involves heinous or serious offences 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.
For the aforesaid view, this Court finds support from
Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3)
RCR (Criminal) 1052, upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 174
dated 05.09.2020 registered under Sections 498-A, 406 of the Indian Penal
Code at Police Station City Gurdaspur and all the consequential proceedings
arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners only.
08.07.2022 (VIVEK PURI)
Janki JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
