Allowed

Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Jan 2012CRM-M/4654/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge court allowed a quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that proceedings involving a dissolved marriage with a settled compromise constitute a misuse of court process and should be quashed.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 343 dated 27.12.2004 under Section 498-A, 406 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.

Ashok Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No. M 4654 of 2010 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No. M 4654 of 2010 Date of decision: 27.01.2012

¶4

Ashok Kumar and another ........ Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondent(s)

¶5

Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶6

-.-

¶7

Present: Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for the petitioners

¶8

Mr. SS Gorapuria, Additional A G Haryana

¶9

Mr. Gaurav Jindal, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant

¶10

-.-

¶11

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?

¶12

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

¶13

Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)

¶15

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.343 dated 27.12.2004 under Section 498-A, 406 IPC, P S Sohna, District Gurgaon (Annexure P-1) which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners on the ground that marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has already been dissolved.

¶16

Affidavit of Respondent No. 2/complainant, admitting the factum that the marriage has been dissolved, all the disputes between the parties have been settled and she has no objection if the said FIR is quashed

¶17

CRM No. M 4654 of 2010 2

¶18

qua the petitioners has been placed on record as A1.

¶19

In the present case, the matrimonial dispute between respondent No. 2 (Sunita) and petitioner No. 1, led to filing the present FIR. As per the affidavit filed by respondent No. 2 (A1), the marriage between both the parties has already been dissolved vide decree of divorce granted vide judgement dated 28.01.2009 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon. In the said affidavit, it is also mentioned that all the disputes between the parties have been settled and she has no objection if the said FIR is quashed qua the petitioners.

¶20

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI-Hawa Singh, PS Sohna, Gurgaon states that the matter has been compromised between the parties vide affidavit A-1.

¶21

The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another- 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:-

¶22

“The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.”

¶23

The Apex Court in the case of ' Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of

¶24

CRM No. M 4654 of 2010 3

¶25

Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:-

¶26

“6. We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”

¶27

Since, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has already been dissolved and they have been living separately, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would be nothing but a sheer misuse of process of Court of law. It is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law. Moreover, as per affidavit (A1) and statement of the learned counsel for the State, this Court is satisfied that the matter has been compromised.

¶28

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 343 dated 27.12.2004 under Section 498-A, 406 IPC, Police Station Sohna, District Gurgaon (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

¶29

Allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶30

27.01.2012 mohan

Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pardeep Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Shiv Dev Singh Rakkar Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Hardeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Karnail Singh Vs Union Territory of Chandigah and Anr.

Rocky and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Pinki and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.