Charanjeet Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Another

CRM-M-26246-2023 (O&M) 226/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26246-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.05.2026 CHARANJEET KAUR AND ANOTHER ... PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. H.S.Randhawa, Advocate and Mr. Anish Kansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rohit Hans, D.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Jagatvir Dhindsa, Advocate for respondent No.2. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 138 dated 08.11.2020 under sections 306, 506, 120B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala as well as the Final Report (Annexure P/2) along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom including order framing charge dated 23.09.2021 on the basis of settlement agreement dated 06.02.2023 (Annexure P/2).

2.

This Court vide order dated 24.04.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise.

3.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala JANKI BHATT 2026.05.27 07:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh has submitted copy of report dated 15.05.2024 to the effect that the

CRM-M-26246-2023 (O&M) compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence.

4.

Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5.

A bare reading of the FIR and the entire set of allegations reveals that there was no immediate instigation on the part of the petitioner which could be said to have driven the deceased to commit suicide. Moreover, the ingredients constituting an offence under Section 306 IPC are not made out.

6.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 7.

Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 138 dated 08.11.2020 under sections 306, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala as well as the Final Report (Annexure P/2) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise, subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- as costs to be deposited in the Punjab and Haryana High Court Dispensary Welfare Fund, A/c No. 45115269583, State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Chandigarh.

(H.S.GREWAL) 22.05.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No JANKI BHATT 2026.05.27 07:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh