Allowed

Harish Bardeja & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Dec 2014CRM-M/21521/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC registered against petitioners in a matrimonial dispute. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that since the parties amicably settled the dispute and the complainant had no objection, continuing prosecution was futile.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.38 dated 20.5.2014 under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Harish Bardeja & Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No.M-21521 of 2014

¶3

.....

¶4

Date of decision:22.12.2014

¶5

Harish Bardeja and another

¶6

.....Petitioners

¶7

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh

¶11

.....

¶12

Present: Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. A.S. Klar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶14

Mr. Ishwar Pal Singh, Advocate for the complainantrespondent No.2.

¶15

Inderjit Singh, J.

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.38 dated 20.5.2014 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at Police Station Women Cell Ludhiana, District Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

¶17

The marriage of petitioner No.1 Harish Bardeja was solemnized with complainant-Reena on 20.4.2006. She gave birth to a son after one year. However, due to temperamental differences between the parties, matrimonial dispute arose and the above said FIR was registered for the above mentioned offences against the petitioners. Now

¶18

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

Cr. Misc. No.M-21521 of 2014

¶20

[2]

¶21

with the intervention of respectable persons of the society, the matrimonial dispute has amicably been resolved. Respondent No.2 has agreed to not to pursue the present case against the petitioners.

¶22

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, has sent her report dated 20.11.2014 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant Reena has stated that with the intervention of close relations, family friends and others, they have compromised without any pressure, coercion or threat with the other party. Now she is residing at her in-laws' house without any pressure, she is happy in her matrimonial life and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

¶23

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainantrespondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their matrimonial dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 and have gone through the record.

¶25

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶26

Cr. Misc. No.M-21521 of 2014

¶27

[3]

¶28

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

¶29

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, has held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.38 dated 20.5.2014 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at Police Station Women Cell Ludhiana, District Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

¶30

December 22, 2014. (Inderjit Singh) Judge hsp

¶31

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Harish Bardeja & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Bardeja & Anr. v. State of Punjab & 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

Sumit Gupta Vs Ashok Sangwan, IAS and Others

Punam Sharma Vs Satish Kumar Aggarwal and Anr.

Nasib Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Karnail Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Raj Kumar @ Raju Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sheetal Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another