Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhvir Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 9 October, 2014
CRM-M No.2328 of 2014 1
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana, at
Chandigarh
CRM-M No.2328 of 2014
Date of decision: 9.10.2014
Lakhbir Singh and others ..Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another ..Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahavir S. Chauhan
Present: Mr. G.N.Malik, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. J.S.Brar, A.A.G.Punjab
for respondent No.1-State
None for respondent No.2
******
Mahavir S.Chauhan, J.(Oral)
By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, petitioners, the accused, in First Information Report (for short, FIR) No. 94 dated 30.9.2011 under Sections 498- A, 406, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short,"IPC") recorded at Police Station, Amargarh District Sangrur, seek quashing of the above said FIR by stating that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the complainant/respondent No.2 as evidenced by the deed of compromise dated 19.12.2013 ( Annexure P2).
FIR was recorded at the instance of respondent No.2, on the allegation that petitioners in connivance with each other hatched a conspiracy and gave beatings to her and expelled her out of matrimonial home in three clothes and gave threats to her to kill NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.13 10:46 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M No.2328 of 2014 2 her. However, now with the intervention of respectables, complainant has effected a compromise (Annexure P2) with petitioners and the complainant/respondent No.2 has resolved not to pursue the matter qua the petitioners.
Vide order dated 23.1.2014, the learned trial Court was asked to record statements of the parties concerned to find out if the compromise is outcome of free will and consent of the parties and is free from any undue influence/pressure/coercion. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Malerkotla has submitted a report dated 27.8.2014 affirming that the compromise is outcome of free will and consent of the parties and is free from any undue influence/pressure/coercion.
The Complainant or her counsel are not present and by doing so, complainant has expressed her disinclination to contest the petition. Learned State counsel also has no objection to the acceptance of this petition.
The matter pertains to matrimonial dispute and the complainant-wife has now settled it with the petitioners.
In B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and Anr., (2003) 4 SCC 675, the husband was one of the appellants while the wife was Respondent No. 2 in the appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. They were living separately for quite some time. An FIR was registered under Sections 498-A/323 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code at the instance of the wife. When the criminal case registered at the instance of the wife was pending, the dispute between the NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.13 10:46 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M No.2328 of 2014 3 husband and wife and their family members was settled. Wife filed an affidavit that her disputes with the husband and the other members of his family had been finally settled and she and her husband had agreed for mutual divorce. Based on the said affidavit, the matter was taken to the High Court by both the parties and they jointly prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings launched against the husband and his family members on the basis of the FIR registered at the wife's instance under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC. The High Court dismissed the petition for quashing the FIR as, in its view, the offences under Sections 498-A and 406, Indian Penal Code were non-compoundable and the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code could not be invoked to by-pass Section 320 of the Code. It is from this order that the matter reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the apex Court held that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers could quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.
Impressing upon the courts to promote settlements in matrimonial cases, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Ors. Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and Anr., 2013 IV AD (S.C.) 59: 2013(4) ADJ 40: 2013(2) ALD(Cri) 148: 2013(3) BomCR(Cri) 438: 116(2013) CLT 572: 2013(2) Crimes 90(SC):
(2013)3 GLR 1875: ILR 2013(2) Kerala 89: 2013(2) J.L.J.R. 225:
2013(2) JCC 1365: 2013(2) JLJ 128, JT2013(4) SC 98: 2013(2) KLT 47: 2013-4-LW 146, 2013-2-LW(Crl) 284: 2013(2) MLJ(Crl) 736: 2013 NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.13 10:46 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M No.2328 of 2014 4 (II) OLR 97: 2013(2) PLJR 312: 2013(2) RCR(Criminal) 427: 2013(2) RLW 1416: 2013(3) SCALE 537: (2013)4 SCC 58: 2013(2) UC 960 (decided On: 15.03.2013).
From the above it is established that the parties to the lis have resolved the inter se dispute amicably and to live in peace and harmony. In such a situation, the FIR and consequent proceedings need to be quashed. Reference may be made to a Five-Judges Bench decision of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Crl.) 1052:2007(3) PLR 439:2007(2) ILR (Punjab) 338:2007(3) AICLR 818:2007(4) CCR 280:2007(59) AIC 435:2007 (4) CTC 769: 2007(4) KLT 245, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (SC) 2012(4) Recent Apex Judgments (RAJ) 549:2012(4) RCR(Crl.) 543:2012(5) CTC 526:2012 Ker.LJ 141:2012(4) KLT 108:2012(4) Law Herald (SC) 3025:2012(5) Knt.LJ 476: 2012(4) Cri.CC 774:2012 (10) SCC 303:2012 AIR (SC)(Cri) 1796: 2012(CriLJ 4934:2012(4) AICLR 551:2012(4) Crimes (SC) 155:2012(9) SCALE 257:2012(2) WLC (SC) Criminal 753.
It is anybody's guess that the parties having entered a compromise, possibility of the trial resulting into conviction of the accused is remote and bleak and that being so continuation of criminal proceedings would visit the accused with great oppression, prejudice and extreme injustice. Rather it would be unfair and contrary to the interest of justice, or say abuse of the process of the Court, if the criminal proceedings are allowed to continue. Ends of justice would be met only if the criminal proceedings are put to an NIRMAL KANT 2014.10.13 10:46 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M No.2328 of 2014 5 end because this would allow the parties to translate their desire to live in peace into reality. The only consideration for the compromise reached between the parties seems to be their desire to bury the hatchet for all times to come. The compromise is also found to be in the interest of public at large, for, it will add to the peace of the society and will promote peaceful co-existence. The Courts are bound to play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of the Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.
In the consequence, I accept the petition, quash the FIR in question as also the proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners and discharge them from the proceedings.
October 9,2014 (MAHAVIR S.CHAUHAN)
nk JUDGE
NIRMAL KANT
2014.10.13 10:46
I am the author of this
document
high court chandigarh