Allowed

Digvijay Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Oct 2024CRM-M/6772/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR relating to matrimonial offences, citing a valid compromise between parties. This decision confirms that inherent powers allow quashing in matrimonial disputes to secure justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0084 dated 20.10.2020 and all consequential proceedings are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.

Digvijay Singh Vs State of Haryana and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-6772-2024 -1-

¶2

IN THE H IGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 240 CRM-M-6772-2024

¶3

Date of Decision: 16.10.2024

Digvijay S ingh

.… Petitioner

Versus

State of H aryana and another

¶8

.... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶10

Present: - Ms. Mehak Sawhney, Advoc a te for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, Advo c ate for Ms. Deepali Verma, Advocat e for respondent No. 2.

¶13

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Prayer in this petition filed u n der Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing o f FIR No. 0084 dated 20.10. 2 020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Se c tions 323, 498-A, 406, 506 a nd 377 IPC at Police Station Gandhi N a gar Yamunanagar, District Ya m unanagar and all consequential proceedin g s arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 04.01.202 4 (Annexure P-2) effected betw e en the parties.

¶15

Pursuant to the order dated 0 8 .02.2024 passed by this Court, parties ha v e appeared before the learne d Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna N agar at Jagadhri; and state m ent of the petitioner-Digvijay Singh wa s recorded on 26.02.2024; wh e reas, statement of respondent No. 2-co m plainant was recorded on 15.07.2024. Learned Judicial Magistrat e Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Ja g adhri, has submitted her report

¶16

RISHU KATARIA 2024.10.19 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶17

CRM-M-6772-2024 -2-

¶18

along wit h statements of the parties vid e letter dated 24.09.2024 duly forwarded by the learned District and Ses s ions Judge, Yamuna Nagar.

¶19

A perusal of the above sai d report would show that the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have ap p eared before the learned trial Court and suffered statements with respec t to the compromise which have been foun d to be genuine, voluntary and w ithout any coercion and undue influence.

¶20

Learned counsel for the pet i tioner, inter alia, submits that the prese n t FIR emanates from the ma t rimonial dispute between the parties. M arriage of the petitioner with t h e respondent-complainant was solemnize d on 06.10.2019. No child was born out of the said wedlock. Both the p arties are residing separately s i nce 30.07.2020. Now, in order to live pe a cefully, parties have entered int o compromise dated 04.01.2024 (Annexur e P-2), according to which, bot h the parties have agreed not to proceed f u rther with the FIR in question. Learned counsel submits that petitioner is the only accused in the pre s ent FIR and he is party to the compromise. It is further submitted that the petitioner has never been declared a s proclaimed offender.

¶21

Learned State counsel has sta t ed that he has ‘no objection’ in case the F I R is quashed on the basis of co m promise qua the petitioner. This Court has heard the lea r ned counsel for the parties and has perus e d the file.

¶22

After perusing the report su b mitted by the learned Judicial Magistrat e Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Ja g adhri, this Court finds that the

¶23

RISHU KATARIA 2024.10.19 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶24

CRM-M-6772-2024 -3-

¶25

matter ha s been amicably settled betwee n the petitioner and respondent No. 2. Si n ce the matter has been settled a nd the parties have decided to live in pe a ce, this Court feels that in ord e r to secure the ends of justice, the crimin a l proceedings deserve to be qu a shed.

¶26

As per the Full Bench judgm e nt of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab”, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held th a t High Court has power under S ection 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compoun d ing of non-compoundable offe n ce and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinio n that the same is required to prevent th e abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. T h is power of quashing is not c o nfined to matrimonial disputes alone.

¶27

Hon'ble Apex Court in the c a se of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in or d er to secure the ends of just i ce or to prevent the abuse of process o f Court, inherent power can b e used by this Court to quash criminal p roceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said j u dgment is reproduced here-in-

¶28

below:-

¶29

“57. The position that emer g es from the above discussion can be summarised thus: th e power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proce e ding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent juris d iction is distinct and different from the power given to a c r iminal court for compounding the offences under Section 3 2 0 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no s tatutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with t he guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the e nds of justice or (ii) to prevent

¶30

RISHU KATARIA 2024.10.19 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶31

CRM-M-6772-2024 -4-

¶32

abuse of the process of any C o urt.”

¶33

In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 0084 da t ed 20.10.2020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 498-A, 4 0 6, 506 and 377 IPC at Police Station G andhi Nagar Yamunanagar, D istrict Yamunanagar and all conseque n tial proceedings arising therefr o m, on the basis of compromise dated 04. 0 1.2024 (Annexure P-2) effe c ted between the parties, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.

¶34

16.10.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE

¶35

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶36

RISHU KATARIA 2024.10.19 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Digvijay Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Digvijay Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

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

Parmeet Singh Vs Manpreet Kaur and Anr.

Deepak Kumar Vs Seema

Luxmi Devi Vs Sandeep and Ors.

Rajiv Goel Vs Suman Rani and Anr.

Balwinder Singh Saggu Vs State of Punjab and Others

Harbans Kaur and Others Vs State of Punjab and Ors.