Harmanpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 28.08.2018 Harmanpreet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Seena Mand, DAG, Punjab.

Respondent No.2 in person.

**** JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.13 dated 18.09.2017 under Sections 498-A, 406 & 506 IPC, registered at Women Police Station, Ludhiana Rural, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with respondent No.2 on 23.12.2012 as per Sikh rites and ceremonies. Out of this wedlock one female child, namely Ripanjit Kaur was born. However, due to temperamental differences between the husband and wife, matrimonial dispute arose and the aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant/respondent No.2. However, now with the intervention of

-2respectable persons, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. A settlement /agreement has been entered into between the parties, a copy thereof is annexed with the petition. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, where the parties have compromised the matter and in terms of the compromise a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed and divorce has been granted. In terms of the compromise a bank draft in the name of respondent No.2 for sum of ` 1,00,000/- has been handed over to her and all terms and conditions of the compromise/settlement have been finalized. The compromise arrived at between the parties seems to be without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same appears to be genuine one.

Ms. Seena Mand, learned DAG, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer, and respondent No. 2, who is present in person, admit to the factum of compromise and learned State counsel submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, they would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and gone through the record.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After

-3considering 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.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed, FIR No.13 dated 18.09.2017 under Sections 498-A, 406 & 506 IPC, registered at Women Police Station, Ludhiana Rural, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua the petitioners. The petition stands disposed of.

28.08.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes.

Whether reportable No.