Crl.Misc.No.M-28857 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-28857 of 2008 Date of Decision: 12 - 2 - 2009 Sandeep Singh Brar and others .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Arihant Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.A.S.Brar, DAG, Punjab. Mr.Sumit Jain, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Navneet Kaur was married with Sandeep Singh Brar on 16.11.2005 at Patiala. They cohabited as husband and wife till 22.11.2005. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 had migrated to Canada and petitioner No.2 to Australia. Respondent No.2 had lodged case FIR No.376 dated 24.8.2006 at Police Station Kotwali, Patiala under Sections 406, 498-A IPC. Petitioners No.1 and 2 were declared as proclaimed offenders as they were abroad. During the pendency of the proceedings, a compromise has been effected between the parties. Counsel for respondent Bhagwant Kaur who had lodged the Crl.Misc.No.M-28857 of 2008 [2] FIR has placed on record a certified copy of the judgment passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Patiala whereby decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act has been granted. He has also placed on record the compromise arrived at between the parties. Same are taken on record. Bhagwant Kaur-respondent No.2 mother of estranged wife-respondent No.3 is present in Court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr.Sumit Jain. HC Hardev Singh who is present in Court to assist counsel for the State, also identified the complainant. Bhagwant Kaur has stated that it was agreed between the parties that at the time of quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise Rs.3 lacs towards Istri Dhan, permanent alimony and maintenance in favour of the wife is to be paid. Mr.Arihant Jain has stated that petitioner No.3 Hardev Singh Brar has handed over two bank drafts dated 26.9.2008 of Punjab National Bank amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- each drawn in favour of Navneet Kaur Sidhu-respondent No.3. Photostat copy of the bank drafts has been retained for records on case file. Shri Jain has handed over the drafts to Bhagwant Kaur. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana, 2003(2) RCR (Criminal) 888 and a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 wherein it has been held that if a matrimonial dispute has been resolved, no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings. Prayer made in the petition can be accepted. Crl.Misc.No.M-28857 of 2008 [3] Another important question has arisen whether petitioners No.1 and 2 who were declared proclaimed offender can seek quashing of the FIR without bowing before the majesty of law. Can any indulgence be granted to the proclaimed offenders? I am of the view that since it is a matrimonial dispute and petitioner No.1 husband has gone abroad to earn livelihood and petitioner No.2 is mother of husband of estranged wife has also gone abroad, their personal appearance before the Court need not be insisted upon in case they deposit costs of Rs.50,000/- each in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. On deposit of costs on behalf of petitioners No.1 and 2, the proceedings against the petitioners be dropped and FIR along with all subsequent proceedings shall stand quashed. Petition stands disposed off. A copy of this order be sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala who shall send the report regarding deposit of costs to this Court. If the costs is not deposited, the present petition will be deemed to have been revived. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) February 12, 2008. JUDGE RC