CRM No.M-34900 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-34900 of 2010 Date of Decision:03.01.2012 [ENTITY] and another Petitioners Versus [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY]. Present: Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.[ENTITY], Sr.Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1-State. Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate, for respondent No.2.
[ENTITY], J.(oral) The compendium of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy involved in the present petition and emanating from the record is that, [ENTITY] daughter of complainant-[ENTITY] (respondent No.2) performed the marriage with [ENTITY] son of [ENTITY] (petitioner No.1) with her own free will, according to the Sikh Rites and Ceremonies at Chandigarh on 08.04.2010, as per marriage certificate, Anneuxre P-2. They were major and performed the marriage against the wishes of their parents. Apprehending danger to their lives, liberty and dignity, they moved a written complaint and the Punjab State Human Rights Commission sought a report from the concerned authority vide order dated 28.04.2010(Annexure P-3). [ENTITY] resided and cohabited with her husband and a male child was born out of the said wedlock.
2. The complainant-[ENTITY] did not reconcile with the marriage of his daughter and lodged a criminal case against her husband [ENTITY] No.1) and his co-accused [ENTITY] No.2), vide impugned FIR bearing No.18 dated 28.02.2010, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT] in the police of Police Station Sadar, S.B.S.Nagar in this regard.
3. During the pendency of the criminal case, good sense prevailed, complainant-[ENTITY] has reconciled with the situation and accepted the marriage of his daughter with petitioner No.1 and the parties have amicably settled the matter by means of compromise-deed(Annexure P-4). The complainant has also filed an affidavit(Annexure P-5) in this relevant behalf.
4. In the wake of settlement of dispute, the petitioners-accused preferred the present petition for quashing the impugned FIR(Annexure P-1), invoking the provisions of [SECTION] [ACT]
5. The parties are present today in the Court and complainant-[ENTITY] has also placed on record his affidavit dated 03.01.2012(Annexure "RX"), which is to the following effect:-
"That now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the parties have compromised the matter vide Compromise-Deed Annexure P-4 and the deponent [ENTITY] does not want to pursue the above said criminal case against the petitioners.
That the compromise deed Annexure P-4 is genuine and bonafide and is in the best interest of both the parties and all persons and children concerned. The same has been entered into out of the free will of the parties and without any pressure and undue influence."
6. Moreover, learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in view of the settlement of disputes between the parties, the instant petition deserves to be accepted in this relevant context.
7. 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 FIR(Annexure P-1) deserves to be quashed in this respect or not?
8. 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 me, answer must obviously be in the affirmative, as justice would be sub-served, if the FIR(Annexure P-1) is quashed and the parties are allowed to live in peace.
9. Sequelly, the law of settlement of criminal disputes by virtue of compromise is no more res integra and is well settled. The clear and explicit intention of the Legislature to compound the offences in this context was transformed in reality by the Hon'ble Apex Court in cases [PRECEDENT]; [PRECEDENT] and Full Bench of this Court in case Kulwinder Singh and others v. [ENTITY] and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.
10. The matrix 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. Meaning thereby, the High Court has unlimited power to quash the criminal proceedings, relatable to such matrimonial cases, on the basis of lawful settlement. The law laid down in the aforesaid judgments "mutatis mutandis" is fully attracted in the present case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
11. As is evident from the record that, complainant-[ENTITY] (respondent No.2) lodged the FIR(Annexure P-1) against the petitioners-accused. Now he has reconciled with the situation and accepted the marriage of his daughter [ENTITY] with [ENTITY] No.1). Above all, God has blessed them with a son. The complainant has filed the affidavit(Annexure "RX") to the effect that in view of the changed circumstances, he does not want to prosecute the matter. Otherwise also, once it stands proved on record that petitioner No.1 and [ENTITY], daughter of the complainant, were major at the relevant time and voluntarily solemnised their marriage with their free will, in that eventuality, the question of committing the offence punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT] by the accused, did not arise at all. Therefore, there is no impediment in quashing the FIR(Annexure P-1), to set the matter at rest, to enable the parties to live in peace and to enjoy the life and liberty in a dignified manner.
12. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the instant petition is hereby accepted. Consequently, FIR No.18 dated 28.02.2010( Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed and the petitioners are accordingly discharged from the indicated case, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
January 03, 2012 ([ENTITY]) seema JUDGE