Criminal Misc.No.M-69823 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.No.M-69823 of 2005 Date of Decision:16.01.2012 [ENTITY] and others Petitioners Versus [ENTITY] Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY]. Present: Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate, for the respondent.
[ENTITY], J.(oral) The crux of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record is that, the marriage of [ENTITY] son of complainant-[ENTITY](respondent) was solemnised with [ENTITY] (petitioner No.3) daughter of [ENTITY] No.1) on 06.12.199[SECTION], according to the Hindu Rites and Ceremonies, at Ludhiana.
2. According to the petitioners, [ENTITY] and his parents started treating [ENTITY]) with cruelty in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. They could not adjust with each other and separation ensued.
3. Thereafter, [ENTITY]) lodged a criminal case against her husband-[ENTITY], respondent(complainant) and others through the medium of FIR No.131 dated 1[SECTION].0[SECTION].2011, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under [SECTION] [ACT] read with [SECTION] and [SECTION] of The [ACT], in the Police Station Chakeri, Kanpur(U.P.). In the same sequence of events, complainant-[ENTITY], father of [ENTITY]) filed a private complaint(Annexure P-1) against the petitioners under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT].
[SECTION]. Taking cognizance of the complaint(Annexure P-1), the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, summoned the petitioners as accused, for the commission of offence punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT], by means of impugned summoning order dated 15.12.2003(Annexure P-2).
5. Aggrieved by it, the petitioners preferred the instant petition, for quashing the impugned complaint(Annexure P-1) and the summoning order (Annexure P-2), on the ground of counter-blast of another cross-case and on the basis of compromise dated 2[SECTION].0[SECTION].200[SECTION](Annexure P-3), invoking the provisions of [SECTION] [ACT]
6. During the pendency of the present case, good sense prevailed and the parties have amicably settled their disputes before the Mediator of this Court, by virtue of Settlement-Deed dated 1[SECTION].01.2011, with the following terms & conditions:-
"(1) That party No.1 namely [ENTITY] on his behalf and others along with counsel has undertaken to withdraw all the proceedings pending against the second party and their relations which had been initiated in pursuance of FIR No.131 dated 1[SECTION].0[SECTION].2001 under [SECTION] [ACT] and under [SECTION] and [SECTION], [ACT], which was registered at the instance of [ENTITY] at PS, Chakeri, Kanpur(U.P.) and shall make earnest efforts to get termination of the proceedings before the C.M.M. at Kanpur against all the accused.
(2) That it is also agreed by the first party that [ENTITY] will not initiate any proceedings either civil or criminal against her husband or any of his relatives regarding dowry articles and to claim property owned by [ENTITY] or by any of the family members.
(3) That if the first party does not make any efforts to terminate the proceedings under [SECTION] and [SECTION] & [SECTION] of the [ACT] before the C.M.M. at Kanpur, then the second party has a right to get the revival of the present case for which the second party would not have any objection for the revival of the present petition.
Both the parties further agreed to file their affidavits for quashing of the complaint/FIR lodged at their instances and to strengthen the term and conditions of the compromise. [ENTITY] will also file an affidavit to the effect that she would comply with the terms and conditions as agreed by her brother and the counsel today. ([SECTION]) That the second party namely [ENTITY] has no objection if the criminal complaint titled as [ENTITY] Vs. [ENTITY] and others under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] [ACT] is withdrawn/quashed which is pending in this Hon'ble Court. (5) That there is no other civil or criminal case is pending against each other. Further, they also undertake that they will not file any civil or criminal arising out of the present dispute/discord.
(6) That both the parties undertake to abide by all the terms and conditions of settlement arrived in the Mediation & Conciliation Centre. The said terms and conditions have been arrived after understanding the terms and conditions of the present settlement, which has been entered with freewill and any coercion. (7) That by signing this agreement, the parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other with respect to maintenance (present, past and future), dowry articles, jewellery, custody etc. and all the disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of mediation and the parties undertake before the Mediation Centre to abide by the terms and conditions set out in the claim and not to dispute the matter hereafter in future and appropriate action can be taken in accordance with law against the party who violates the terms and conditions of the settlement."
7. Meaning thereby, the parties have settled their disputes in the manner indicated hereinabove. Moreover, learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the impugned complaint(Annexure P-1) and the summoning order(Annexure P-2) are liable to be quashed, in view of the settlement/compromise.
8. Above being the position on record, now the short and significant question, though important, that arises for determination in this petition is as to whether the impugned complaint(Annexure P-1) and the summoning order (Annexure P-2) deserve to be quashed in this respect or not?
9. Having regard to the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, justice would be sub- served, if the impugned complaint(Annexure P-1) and the summoning order (Annexure P-2) are quashed and the parties are allowed to live in peace after settlement of their disputes.
10. It is not a matter of dispute that the law of settlement of criminal disputes by virtue of compromise between the parties is no more res integra and is well settled. The clear and explicit intention of the Legislature in this relevant connection was transformed in reality by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases Manoj Sharma v. State & Ors. 2008([SECTION]) RCR (Criminal) 827; [PRECEDENT] and Full Bench of this Court in case [PRECEDENT].
11. The compendium of the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments is that the power under [SECTION] [ACT] has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society and resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a 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 if the statement is fair being free from under pressure. That means, the High Court has unlimited power to quash the criminal proceedings, relatable to such matrimonial disputes/occurrence, on the basis of lawful settlement. The law laid down in the aforesaid judgments "mutatis mutandis" is fully applicable in the present case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
12. As is evident from the record that, in the instant case, the parties have lawfully settled their disputes before the Mediator, as per terms & conditions dated 1[SECTION].01.2011, in the manner depicted hereinabove. Therefore, to me, there is no legal impediment in translating the wishes of the parties into reality and to quash the criminal prosecution to set the matter at rest to enable them to live in peace and to enjoy the life and liberty in a dignified manner.
13. In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant petition is accepted. Consequently, the impugned complaint(Annexure P-1), the summoning order (Annexure P-2) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby set aside and the petitioners are accordingly discharged from the indicated case, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
January 16, 2012 ([ENTITY]) seema JUDGE