Allowed

Sandeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Dec 2015CRM-M/24219/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed an FIR arising from a matrimonial dispute under Sections 406/498-A/323 IPC after recording a satisfied report that a valid compromise was arrived at between the husband, mother-in-law, and the wife, holding it a fit case for quashing under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 18 dated 26.12.2013 under Sections 406/498-A, 323 IPC and all subsequent proceedings were quashed.

Sandeep Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

CRM-M 24219/2015

115

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

Date of decision:15.12.2015

¶6

Sandeep Singh and another

¶7

.............Petitioners

¶8

¶9

State of Punjab and another

¶10

.............Respondent

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶12

Present:Mr.JS Dadwal,Advocate for the petitioners

¶13

Mr.Kirat Singh Sidhu,DAG Punjab

¶14

Mr.Jasdip Singh,Advocate for the complainant.

¶15

Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)

¶16

Prayer is for quashing of FIR No.18 dated 26.12.2013 under Sections 406/498-A,323, IPC, PS Women, Police District Jagron, Distt.Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 1.2.2014(P-2) arrived at between the parties.

¶17

Vide order dated 27.7.2015 parties were directed to get their statements recorded regarding genuineness of the compromise.

¶18

In compliance thereof,learned SDJM,Jagron vide report dated 20.11.2015 (taken on record as Mark-A) has reported that the complainant has effected the compromise with both the accused with her own will and without any coercion or pressure from any corner.

¶19

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.12.15 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

¶20

CRM-M 24219/2015 2

¶21

115

¶22

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Jasvir Singh states that after investigations, a cancellation report has been submitted.

¶23

The dispute herein is matrimonial in nature and accused petitioners are husband and mother-in-law of complainant/respondent no.2.

¶24

Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2003)4 SCC 675, B.S.Joshi

¶25

and others v State of Haryana and another has made it explicitly clear in para 15 of its judgment that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or effect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.

¶26

A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v State of Punjab and another, 2007(3)RCR(Criminal) 1052 has

¶27

held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non-compoundable offences. The relevant extract reads as under:-

¶28

“The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C., which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court

¶29

has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in

¶30

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.12.15 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

CRM-M 24219/2015

115

non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.”

¶35

Hon'ble Apex Court in another case in J.T.2008(9) SC 192

¶36

Nikhil Merchant v Central Bureau of Investigation and Another

¶37

while relying upon its decision in B.S.Joshi' s case (supra) has also held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of criminal proceedings and the continuance of the same after compromise between the parties would be a futile exercise.

¶38

Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in

¶39

Madan Mohan Abot v State of Punjab, 2008(4) SCC 582 , the relevant extract of which is as under:-

¶40

“We need to emphasise 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

¶41

approach to the matter based on ground of realities

¶42

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.12.15 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

¶43

CRM-M 24219/2015 4

¶44

115

¶45

and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”

¶46

Keeping in view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice.

¶47

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.18 dated 26.12.2013 under Sections 406/498-A,323, IPC, PS Women, Police District Jagron, Distt.Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.

¶48

15.12.2015. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge

¶49

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.12.15 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

Sandeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and 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

Surinder Pal Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Surinder Bali Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Vikas Vs State of Haryana

Nand Kishore Vs State of Punjab

Paramjit Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sukhjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab