Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.05.2011 Sukhwinder Singh and others ......Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Sh. Raghubir Chaudhary, Sr. DAG, Punjab for respondent No. 1-State None for respondent No. 2 **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.50 dated 26.03.2007, under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Division No.5, District Jalandhar and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed (Annexure P-1). The marriage of Baljit Kaur-complainant was solemnised with Sukhwinder Singh, petitioner no.1 on 22.11.2000 in the area of Police Station Dasuya as per Sikh Rites. Out of this wedlock, two children namely Gurpreet Singh (son) and Rupinder Kaur (daughter) were born. Petitioner no.1 got married with Baljit Kaur fraudulently by saying that he was permanently settled in Germany. On account of matrimonial differences between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, the instant FIR Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011(O&M) -2- was registered against the petitioners. However, during the pendency of the trial, both the parties arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the respectables, friends and relatives of both the parties. Both the parties also agreed to file a divorce petition by way of mutual consent. Both the parties have further undertaken not to file any Civil or Cirminal case against each other regarding the above said incident In compliance of the order dated 08.02.2011, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court and get their statements recorded. Status report has been submitted with regard to the validity of compromise. As per the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, both parties appeared before the Court and made their statements. As per the statement of Baljit Kaur, complainant, she has stated that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and all the claims have been settled. She has also stated that a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by her husband in the Court of District Judge, Jalandhar. She has also identified her signatures on the compromise deed. Statement of Sukhwinder Singh, petitioner no.1, has been recorded and he has also identified his signature on the compromise Ex.PX. From the statements of both the parties, the compromise appears to be genuine. Broad guidelines have been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 for quashing the prosecution when parties entered into compromise. The Full Bench has observed that this power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:- Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011(O&M) -3- “26. In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, (1980)1 SCC 63, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words :- “The finest hour of justice arrived propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” 27. The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice. No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) if the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 28. 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 emity and reduces 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 by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011(O&M) -4- is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.” The ratio of the Full Bench judgment is a special reference which has been made to the offences against human body other than murder and culpable homicide where the victim dies in the course of transaction would fall in the category where compounding may not be permitted. Heinous offences like highway robbery, dacoity or a case involving clear- cut allegations of rape should also fall in the prohibited category. However, the offences against human body other than murder and culpable homicide may be permitted to be compounded when the Court is in the position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. The Court must examine the cases of weaker and vulnerable victims with necessary caution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and another 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910 has examined a case where quashing was sought of an FIR under Section 498-A IPC being non- compoundable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that :- “Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the parties have settled their differences. It was submitted on behalf of the complainant Smt. Sadhna Madnawat that she is not interested in prosecuting the appellants. It may be pertinent to mention that the parties hail from cultured and educated families. It was also submitted that the appellant's parents are suffering from multiple ailments because of advanced age. The appellant's father is a Crl. Misc. No. M-4052 of 2011(O&M) -5- retired Professor and Dean, Veterinary College, Mathura and he had undergone transplant of his kidney and the appellant's mother is suffering from multiple ailments and is virtually bed-ridden.” Consequently, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and another (supra), the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another (supra), FIR No.50 dated 26.03.2007, under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Division No.5, District Jalandhar is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners. The petition stands disposed of. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE May 06, 2011 dinesh