Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manish Thareja And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 29 March, 2012
Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
--
Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009
Date of decision: 29.03.2012
Manish Thareja and others ........ Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s)
Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr. Kuldeepak Bakshi, Advocate
for the petitioners
Mr. Navdeep Sukhna,DAG, Punjab
for the respondent State
Mr. H S Deol, Advocate
for respondent No. 2
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment 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. 216 dated 20.09.2009 under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Muktsar City (Annexure P-8) which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners on the basis of the compromise entered between the parties.
On 13.02.2012, the following order was passed:-
"Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from petitioners No. 1 and 2 who are brothers of petitioner No. Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 2 7 and learned counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions from Mr. Himanshu, who is stated to be the brother of respondent No. 2, jointly state that the parties are agreed to compromise the matter in case, the petitioners pay Rs.5 lacs towards full and final settlement with respect to maintenance, istridhan etc. subject to respondent-complainant having no objection to the quashing of the FIR and filing a divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 at Delhi.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, states that Rs.2 lacs shall be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR, Rs.1 lac at the time of first motion and the remaining Rs.2 lacs shall be paid at the time of second motion. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2, on instructions states that respondent No. 2 shall have no objection to this.
List on 29.03.2012. Parties shall be present in the Court in person on the date fixed.
Meanwhile, the personal appearance of the parties shall remain exempted before the trial Court except as and when required."
Today, in pursuance to the said order, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record an affidavit of Pankaj Thareja (petitioner No. 7) who is husband of respondent No. 2 along with a special power of attorney executed by Pankaj Thareja in favour of petitioner No. 1 Manish Thareja, who is present in Court today along with his counsel. The same is taken on record.
As per the said affidavit, the matter has been compromised and the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. Petitioner No. 7 shall pay Rs.5 lacs to respondent No. 2 as full and final settlement towards her past, present and future maintenance, permanent alimony for divorce by mutual consent, dowry, istridhan and gifts etc. Out of said Rs.5 lacs, Rs.2 Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 3 lac shall be paid to respondent No. 2 by way of draft at the time of quashing of FIR proceedings, Rs.1 lac shall be paid by way of draft to respondent No. 2 in Court while recording of her statement before a Court where a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is to be filed and balance Rs.2 lacs shall be paid by way of draft to respondent No. 2 at the second motion of petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It is further stated that Attorney Manish Thareja, shall complete all the necessary formalities qua CRM M 36996 of 2009.
Respondent No. 2 is present in Court along with her counsel. In pursuance to the said compromise, she has duly received two drafts bearing No. 206277 and 20678 dated 26.03.2012, issued by the ICICI Bank, Vikas Puri, New Dehli, bearing No. 206277 and 20678 dated 26.03.2012, for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each. She has also got recorded her statement in Court today. As per the said statement, the matter has been compromised. Further, she also stated that she will withdraw the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending in the Court at Muktsar. She has also stated that she has no objection to the filing of divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995.
It is evident from affidavit dated 29.03.2012 of petitioner No. 7 (husband) filed before this Court and the statement of respondent No. 2 that the matter has been amicably settled.
Respondent No. 2 has received two drafts of Rs.1 lac each in pursuance to the compromise arrived at between the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties agree that the said divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955 shall be filed before a Court of Competent Jurisdiction at Delhi on or before 04.04.2012. Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 4
Since the parties have amicably compromised the matter, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings.
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."Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 5
Taking into account the allegations, compromise, statement of respondent No.2 as well as affidavit of petitioner No. 7, 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. 216 dated 20.09.2009 under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Muktsar City (Annexure P-8) and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.
In view of the above, it is also ordered that :-
1. Both the parties i.e. respondent No.2 and petitioner No. 7 shall file a divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court at Delhi on or before 04.04.2012. The necessary formalities in this regard shall be worked out by the parties through their counsel.
2. Respondent No. 2-complainant shall withdraw the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending in the Court at Muktsar. The same shall be withdrawn within one week from the date of filing of a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court at Delhi.
3. The said compromise is towards the full and final settlement. The parties shall have no other claims against each other.
4. Petitioner No. 7 shall be bound by his affidavit dated Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 6 29.03.2012 filed before this Court. Similarly, respondent No. 2 shall also be bound by her statement suffered before this Court today.
5. The parties will co-operate with each other for filing of the petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and make the statement before the said Court for grant of divorce by mutual consent.
Allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 29.03.2012 mohan Criminal Misc. M 36996 of 2009 7 Statement of Shaiphali Thareja wife of Pankaj Thareja, resident of House No. 211, Bank Road, Mithan Lal Street, Muktsar, presently residing at Block No. 199 B, Punggol Field #05-421, Singapore-822 199
-.-
FIR No. 216 dated 20.09.2009 under Section 498-A, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Muktsar City was got registered by me against the petitioners. Now, the matter has been compromised. In pursuance to the said compromise, total amount, for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- is to be paid by my husband - respondent No. 7 (Pankaj Thareja) to me. The said Rs.5,00,000/- shall be paid towards the full and final settlement. Rs.1,00,000/- will be paid at the time of first motion of petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, to be filed in the competent Court at Delhi and remaining Rs.2,00,000/- will be paid to me at the second motion of petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Today, I received two drafts bearing No. 206277 and 20678 dated 26.03.2012, issued by the ICICI Bank, Vikas Puri, New Dehli, bearing No. 206277 and 20678 dated 26.03.2012, for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each. I shall withdraw the divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending in the Court at Muktsar. I have no objection to the filing of Divorce Petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. I am bound by my said statement.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 29.03.2012 RO&AC (Shaiphali) Complainant Identified by Advocate