High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/31900/2017allowed

Sher Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2017-11-29Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh4 pages

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

(1) Criminal Misc. No.M-31900 of 2017 Date of decision:29.11.2017 Sher Singh and others .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents ....

(2) Criminal Misc. No.M-31524 of 2017 .....

Surinder Kaur .....Petitioner v.

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents ....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Amit Bhanot, Advocate for the petitioners in Cr. Misc. No.M-31900 of 2017 and for respondent No.2 in Cr. Misc. No.M-31524 of 2017.

Mr. Naveen Sheokand, Advocate for the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No.M-31524 of 2017 and for respondent No.2 in Cr. Misc. No.M-31900 of 2017.

Ms. Simranjeet Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This order will dispose of the above mentioned two criminal miscellaneous petitions i.e. Criminal Misc. No.M-31900 of 2017 filed

[2] under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.21 dated 11.2.2013 registered for the offence under Section 498-A IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar, another FIR No.20 dated 7.2.2013 registered for the offences under Section 66-A of the I.T. Act read with Section 506 IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar and Criminal Misc. No.M-31524 of 2017 filed for quashing of FIR No.13 dated 30.1.2013 registered for the offence under Section 309 IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

The above mentioned three FIRs were got registered against each other by the petitioners of both the petitions as there was a matrimonial dispute between Surinder Kaur and her husband Sher Singh. Ranjodh Singh and Narinder Kaur are her father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively. These are cases of version and cross-version. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, both the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and have effected a compromise and resolved matrimonial dispute between Surinder Kaur and Sher Singh.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rupnagar has sent three reports dated 6.11.2017 in the three FIRs submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine and the complainants have no objections if the

[3] above mentioned three FIRs are quashed.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainants 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 FIRs in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. 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 dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, these petitions are allowed and FIR No.21 dated 11.2.2013 registered for the offence under Section 498-A IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar, another FIR No.20 dated 7.2.2013 registered for the offences under Section 66-A of the I.T. Act read with Section 506 IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar and FIR No.13 dated 30.1.2013

[4] registered for the offence under Section 309 IPC at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar and all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. November 29, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable: