Punjab-Haryana High Court
Deepak Malhotra And Ors vs State Of Ut Chandigarh And Anr on 24 January, 2020
Author: Jaishree Thakur
Bench: Jaishree Thakur
Crl. Misc. M 17167 of 2018 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. M 17167 of 2018 (O&M)
Date of decision: 24.1.2020
Deepak Malhotra
...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.T., Chandigarh and another
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present: Mr. Jagtar Kureel, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate, for
Mr. GD Wasu, APP, UT, Chandigarh.
JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking for quashing of FIR No. 18 dated 22.1.2017 (Annexure P/1) registered under Sections 448, 363, 511, 34 IPC at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise.
The marriage of the complainant was solemnized with petitioner on 21.2.2015. However, due to temperamental differences between the husband and wife, matrimonial dispute arose and in pursuance of that aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant- Pooja Rani. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and they have entered into a compromise.
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-02-2020 16:23:15 ::: Crl. Misc. M 17167 of 2018 2 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. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Chandigarh Administration, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, admits 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 FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also 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 considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial 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 matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-02-2020 16:23:16 ::: Crl. Misc. M 17167 of 2018 3 another (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 18 dated 22.1.2017 (Annexure P/1) registered under Sections 448, 363, 511, 34 IPC at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua the petitioner.
The petition stands disposed of.
24.1.2020 (JAISHREE THAKUR)
prem JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 02-02-2020 16:23:16 :::