Hardeep Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 12113 P&H

CRM-M-41530-2019                                                     -1-

254         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                              CRM-M-41530-2019
                                              Date of Decision: 23.09.2022



HARDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER                            ... PETITIONERS

                          V/S

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER                          ... RESPONDENTS


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI

Present:    Mr. Umesh Kumar Kanwar, Advocate for the petitioners.

            Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, DAG Punjab.

            Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate for
            Mr. R.S.Dadwal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

            ***

VIVEK PURI, J. (ORAL)

Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of

FIR No.103 dated 08.12.2013 registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 of

the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Women Cell, District Jalandhar City

all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of

Settlement (Annexure P-2).

On 26.09.2019, 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 send its report regarding genuineness of

the compromise.

In compliance of the order dated 26.09.2019, learned Judicial

Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar has recorded the statements of the parties

1 of 3

and submitted the report, the relevant portion whereof reads as under:-

"In compliance to the order dated 24.02.2020 of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, it is respectfully submitted that in view of the statements got recorded by the parties, this court is satisfied that the compromise effected between them is genuine one, which is not the result of any pressure or coercion and the settlement effected between them is not having any adverse affect upon the rights of any third party."

Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the marriage of

petitioner No.1 was solemnized with respondent No.2 on 03.04.2013 but no

child has been born from the wedlock. Although, the allegations were

levelled against the other family members but the FIR has been registered

only against the petitioners. The matrimonial dispute has been amicably

settled between the parties. The marriage of petitioner No.1 with 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 dated 12.03.2020 passed by the Court of learned Family Court,

Jalandhar. A sum of Rs. 4,80,000/- has been paid to respondent No.2 on

account of 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

2 of 3

at a settlement, out of the Court, by way of Settlement (Annexure P-2). 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.

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. 103

dated 08.12.2013 registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 of the Indian

Penal Code at Police Station Women Cell, District Jalandhar City and all

the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the

petitioners only.

23.09.2022                                            (VIVEK PURI)
Janki                                                    JUDGE

              Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
              Whether reportable       : Yes/No




                                3 of 3