Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sandeeep Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Another on 27 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
Neutral Citation Number 2023:PHHC:060216
Page No. -:1:-
Case Number CRM-M-51171-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-51171-2019
Date of Decision:-27.04.2023
SANDEEEP KAUR
... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
... Respondents
-.-
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
-.-
Present:- Mr. Dinesh Nagar, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Chaman Lal Pawar, Addl. A.G. Punjab.
Mr. Aashish, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
-.-
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition is for quashing of FIR No.143 dated 6.10.2019
registered under Sections 306 IPC at Police Station Mahilpur, District
Hoshiarpur on the basis of compromise dated 7.11.2019 (Annexure P-
2) along with other consequential proceedings arising thereto.
2. The abovesaid FIR was registered on the statement of
complainant/respondent No.2-Balvir Singh against the petitioner.
3. On notice of motion, respondent No.2 appeared in the Court through
his counsel and pleaded that he has no objection if the FIR in this case
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
Neutral Citation Number 2023:PHHC:060216
Case Number CRM-M-51171-2019
is quashed on the basis of the aforesaid compromise which has been
effected between the parties.
4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate was directed to record the statements of the all the
concerned parties with regard to genuineness and validity or otherwise
of the aforesaid compromise.
5. In compliance thereof, report from the Court of District & Sessions
Judge, Hoshiarpur along with statements of the parties has been
received, in which, it is mentioned that the compromise is genuine and
there was no undue influence or coercion from any side.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 is real brother of
deceased Sukhdev Singh who committed suicide on 6.10.2019. The
matter was reported to the police by respondent No.2, who alleged
that petitioner-Sandeep Kaur seduced Sukhdev Singh and developed
physical relations with him and thereafter petitioner started black-
mailing Sukhdev Singh and demanded money from him and
persistently harassed the deceased and compelled the deceased to end
his life by committing suicide.
8. Admittedly deceased Sukhdev Singh was married and he left behind
his widow and two children. The wife and son of the deceased have
also pleaded no objection if the present petition is allowed and to this
effect their separate statements were recorded by the Court below.
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
Neutral Citation Number 2023:PHHC:060216
Case Number CRM-M-51171-2019
9. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in view of the
settlement effected between the parties, the present petition deserves
to be accepted. It has also come on record that the aforesaid
compromise is genuine and the parties effected the same without any
undue influence or coercion. The counsel for the parties have also
admitted that before ending his life, Sukhdev Singh did not leave
behind any suicide note.
10. In case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh, 2002(2) RCR(Criminal) 687, the Hon'ble Apex Court
quashed the criminal proceedings under Sections 306 IPC against the
accused who was having quarrel with the deceased and told the
deceased to go and die and the deceased committed suicide on the
third day of quarrel.
11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in S.S. Chheena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan
and Ors. 2010(4) RCR(Criminal) 66, while quashing a charge
framed against the accused under Section 306 IPC observed that
conviction merely on basis of harassment of deceased is unsustainable
in law, without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or
aid in committing suicide and the said act must have been intended to
push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.
12. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shabbir Hussain Vs. The
State of Madhya Pradesh and others 2022 (1) RCR Criminal 610
held that in order to bring a case within the provision of Section 306
IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said
offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
Neutral Citation Number 2023:PHHC:060216
Case Number CRM-M-51171-2019
suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigating or by
doing a certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Mere
harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused
proximate to the time of occurrence which led to the suicide would
not amount to an offence under Section 306 IPC.
13. In view of the aforesaid settled law, it is clear that in order to
prosecute a person under Section 306 IPC, there has to be a clear
mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct
act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and
this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a
position that he committed suicide. In the instant case, prima facie,
nothing is available on record to show that there was intention on the
part of the petitioner and she actively committed certain acts
proximate to the time of occurrence and thus compelled the deceased
to commit suicide. Further, it appears that the parties have settled their
dispute in an amicable manner.
14. The Coordinate Bench of this Court quashed FIR registered under
Section 306 IPC on the basis of compromise in CRM-M-29142-2021
Arsh Vikram Singh vs. State of Punjab and Ors. decided on
4.5.2022 after discussing the settled law relating to ambit of Section
306 IPC.
15. In light of the above, this Court is of the view that the continuation of
the criminal proceedings under Section 306 IPC against the petitioner
would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. As per the full
Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
Neutral Citation Number 2023:PHHC:060216
Case Number CRM-M-51171-2019
State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is
held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C to allow the
compounding of non compoundable offence and quash the
prosecution where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is
required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gian Singh
Vs. State of Punjab and another 2012 (4) RCR Criminal 543 had
also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent
the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this
Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been
effected
16. For the reasons aforestated and having regard to the law laid down by
Hon'ble Apex Court aforecited judgments, this petition is allowed and
FIR No.143 dated 6.10.2019 registered under Sections 306 IPC at
Police Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur on the basis of
compromise dated 7.11.2019 (Annexure P-2) and all the subsequent
proceedings thereof are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
( KARAMJIT SINGH)
27.04.2023 JUDGE
Gaurav Sorot
Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No
Whether reportable? Yes / No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060216
5 of 5
