Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravi Kumar Dhawan & Others vs Union Territory Chandigarh And Another on 8 May, 2009
Author: Rajan Gupta
Bench: Rajan Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc No. M-8617 of 2009
Date of decision : 08.05.2009
Ravi Kumar Dhawan & Others
....Petitioners
V/s
Union Territory Chandigarh and another
....Respondents
BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Ms. Kranti P. Bhoslae, Advocate with
Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate
for U.T. Chandigarh.
Mr. Anil Malhotra, Advocate
for the complainant.
RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL)
This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 240/2006 dated 28.07.2006 registered under Sections 406, 498-A IPC on behalf of the petitioners on ground that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and entire matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a decree of divorce has been granted by Court of Additional District Judge, Chandigarh under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act on 06.05.2009. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for respondent No. 2. Counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for respondent No. 2, agree that terms of the compromise have been incorporated in the said decree. It has been further submitted that all the dowry articles have been handed-over to respondent No.2. Apart from this, in lieu of demand-draft for a sum of Rs. 1.00 lac which was deposited with the Police, cash payment of Crl. Misc No. M-8617 of 2009 -2- Rs. 1.00 lac has been made to respondent No. 2. An affidavit sworn by respondent No. 2 has been produced which is taken on record as Mark 'A' Learned counsel for U.T. Chandigarh submits that it being a matrimonial dispute and the same having been resolved amicably, the State will not stand in the way of quashing of the FIR in question.
The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings.
In view of the above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR(Crl.), 1052.
Resultantly the present petition is allowed, the FIR in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
08.05.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE