Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parveen vs State Of Haryana And Another on 24 April, 2023
CRM-M-51048-2022 1
2023:PHHC:058374
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.274 CRM-M-51048-2022
Date of Decision: 24.04.2023
Parveen .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHITYA
Present: Mr. Abhishek Chha, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, DAG Haryana.
Ms. Navneet Kaur, 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.448 dated 18.11.2017, registered under Section
509 IPC (Section 506 IPC has been added later on) at P.S.Kundli, District
Sonepat (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, in view of the compromise/first motion statement of parties under
Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, dated 03.10.2022 (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 14.02.2023. Pursuant thereto, a
report dated 01.04.2023 has been received from Judicial Magistrate 1* Class,
2028.08.07 17:55 Sonepat, at Flag 'A', stating that the compromise arrived at between the
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-51048-2022 2
2023:PHHC:058374
parties is without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. There is no
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
MANINDER ° . .
2023.04.27 17:56 cannot be termed as crime against the society; nor do they show mental
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-51048-2022 3
2023:PHHC:058374
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.448 dated
18.11.2017, registered under Section 509 IPC (Section 506 IPC has been
added later on) at P.S.Kundli, District Sonepat, and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA)
JUDGE
24.04.2023
Maninder
Whether speaking/reasoned --_: Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
MANINDER
2023.04.27 17:55
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
