Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manish Kumar Grover And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 6 December, 2010
CRM No. M 35652 of 2010 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
--
CRM No. M 35652 of 2010
Date of decision: 06.12.2010
Manish Kumar Grover and others ........Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s)
Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate for
Mr. S S Behl, Advocate
for the petitioners
Mr. P S Bajwa, DAG, Punjab
for the respondent
Mr. B S Bhalla, Advocate
for respondent No. 2 - complainant
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in
the Digest?
Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.59 dated 30.04.2010 under Sections 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, P.S. Islamabad, District Amritsar City (Annexure P-1) which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 02.12.2010 arrived at between the CRM No. M 35652 of 2010 2 parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.
Respondent No. 2 is present in Court today along with her counsel.
As per the compromise (P2), a total amount of Rs.7 lacs has been determined as full and final amount for settling their dispute including alimony, maintenance, matrimonial expenses etc. along with jewellery. Out of Rs.7 lacs, a draft of Rs.2 lacs along with jewellery has been handed over today in Court and remaining Rs.5 lacs shall be paid in two phases i.e. another Rs.2 lacs shall be given at the time of quashing of the above mentioned FIR and remaining Rs.3 lacs shall be paid at the time of final grant of divorce under Section 13-B by the Court at Chandigarh.
A separate statement of the complainant is also got recorded in the Court wherein, she has stated that the said FIR was got registered by her and now the matter has been compromised. As per the said compromise, a demand draft for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has already been handed over to complainant at the time of granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In pursuant to the said compromise, a demand draft bearing No. 666654 dated 04.12.2010 for a sum of 2,00,000/- has also been handed over to her in Court today. Accordingly, respondent No. 2 has no objection if FIR is quashed.
Further, reply by way of affidavit of the complainant has also been filed in Court today stating therein that she has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. The same is taken on record.
In the present case, the matrimonial dispute led to filing of the present FIR. Now, the matter has been compromised. CRM No. M 35652 of 2010 3
The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:-
"The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power."
The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:-
"6. We need to emphasize 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 approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties CRM No. M 35652 of 2010 4 without any pressure. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed.
Taking into account the allegations, affidavit as well as the statement of the complainant, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law. .
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.59 dated 30.04.2010 under Sections 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, P S Islamabad, District Amritsar City and further proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.
Allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 06.12.2010 mohan