Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manish Sharma vs State Of Punjab And Another on 11 April, 2023
CRM-M-7869-2022 1
2023:PHHC:051189
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.262 CRM-M-7869-2022
Date of Decision: 11.04.2023
Manish Sharma .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHITYA
Present: Mr. Karanvir Hooda, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harpreet Singh, Addl. A.G.Punjab.
Mr. Govind Rana, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
3 2k 3
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking quashing of FIR No.121 dated 02.12.2021, registered under Sections
498-A and 406 IPC at Police Station Taragarh City, District Pathankot
(Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, in view
of the compromise, dated 20.01.2022 (Annexure P-2), entered into between
the petitioner and the complainant to settle their disputes in question.
2. As the parties entered into a compromise to resolve their
disputes which led to registration of the criminal case, they were directed to
appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for getting their statements
recorded in that regard, vide order dated 24.02.2022. Pursuant thereto, a
report dated 04.06.2022 has been received from Judicial Magistrate 1* Class,
Pathankot, at Flag 'A', stating that the compromise arrived at between the
parties is without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. There is no
MANINDER
2023.04.13 18:31
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-7869-2022 2
2023:PHHC:051189
criminal case pending against the petitioner, nor has he been declared a
proclaimed person.
3. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent No.2-complainant admit the factum of compromise, and
submit that they have no objection to quashing of the FIR on that basis.
4. It has been held by the Supreme Court of India in cases Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 and State of
Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others, (2019) 5 SCC 688, that
criminal cases having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those
arising out of commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or family
disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their disputes
among themselves in a bona fide manner by entering into a compromise.
5. Further, reference can also be made to Full Bench judgment of
this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another,
2007(3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 1052, holding that on the parties settling their
disputes by way of a compromise, the High Court in exercise of power under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. can allow the compounding of non-compoundable
offences also, and quash the criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of the
process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The power is not
confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
6. A perusal of the allegations in the FIR as well as the aforesaid
report establishes that the present case, arising out of matrimonial
relationship, falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High
Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as
per law laid down in the aforementioned judgments. The petitioner has no
criminal antecedents. The offences alleged are not heinous in nature and
cannot be termed as crime against the society; nor do they show mental
and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
| attest to the accurac
CRM-M-7869-2022 3
2023:PHHC:051189
depravity of the petitioner. Since disputes between the parties have been
amicably resolved by way of the compromise, continuation of criminal
proceedings will be an exercise in futility, as chances of ultimate conviction
are not there, and it will hamper their peaceful coexistence even after
resolution of disputes.
7. Consequently, this petition is allowed. FIR No.121 dated
02.12.2021, registered under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC at Police Station
Taragarh City, District Pathankot, and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA)
JUDGE
11.04.2023
Maninder
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
MANINDER
2023.04.13 18:31
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
