Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 Date of decision:-21.5.2008 Smt. Preeti Sapru and another ...Petitioners Versus Deepak Sehdev and another ...Respondents ---- (2) Criminal Misc. No. M-48612 of 2007 Dr. Ritu Bhandari and others ...Petitioners Versus Deepak Sehdev and another ...Respondents ----- (3) Criminal Misc. No. M-11978 of 2008 Ashok Sehdev and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Mr. S.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioners in Criminal Misc. No.29722-M and M-48612 of 2007 and for respondent-complainant in Criminal Misc. No.M-11978 of 2008. Mr. Munish Behl, Advocate for the petitioners in Criminal Misc. No. M-11978 of 2008 and for respondent No.1 in Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 and M-48612 of 2007. Mr. A.S. Brar, DAG Punjab for respondent No.2 in Criminal Misc. No.29722-M and M-48612 of 2007. Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -2- Mr. Ajay Ghengas, DAG Haryana, for respondent No.1 in Criminal Misc. No. M-11978 of 2008. RAJESH BINDAL J. This order will dispose of three petitions bearing Criminal Misc. Nos. 29722-M of 2007, Criminal Misc. No. M-48612 of 2007 and Criminal Misc. No. M-11978 of 2008. Prayer in Criminal Misc. No.29722-M of 2007 is for quashing of complaint filed by Dr. Deepak Sehdev against the petitioners under Sections 452/323/497/427/506/34 IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar in which the petitioners have been summoned to face trial under Sections 452/323/427/506 IPC. The prayer in Criminal Misc. No. M-48612 of 2007 is for quashing of the complaint as mentioned above on behalf of other accused in the same complaint. The prayer in Criminal Misc. No. M-11978 of 2008 is for quashing of FIR No.121 dated 20.06.2004, registered under Sections 406/498-A and 298 IPC at Police Station Chandi Mandir, District Panchkula by Kiran Sehdev @ Ritu Bhandari against the petitioners therein. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the prayer made in all the three petitions deserves to be accepted for the reason that the disputes between the parties have been settled amicably with the intervention of the court. The brief narration of the facts is necessary. The present proceedings arise out of a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The marriage of Dr. Deepak Sehdev was solemnized with Dr. Ritu Bhandari on January 26, 2000. Out of wedlock, a son was born on December 10, 2001. However, the parties could not pull on together. The same resulted in filing Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -3- of complaints, FIRs, Civil suits with all sorts of allegations and counter allegations. In total seven cases, filed by the parties against each other, were pending in different courts at different places which included petition filed for divorce by Dr. Deepak Sehdev. On March 25, 2008 after intervention of the court, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement. To make the order comprehensive I deem it appropriate to extract the relevant statements and the orders passed at interim stage. The statements of Dr. Ritu Bhandari and Dr. Deepak Sehdev recorded on March 25, 2008 and the order passed by the Court on that date, are extracted below:- “Statement of Dr. Ritu Bhandari daughter of Shri Gopal Krishan Bhandari, aged 34 years, resident of House No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula. I was married with Dr. Deepak Sehdev on 26th January, 2000. Because of certain differences we could not live together. Now we are living separately since 19th June, 2004. Thereafter, there had been a lot of litigation between the parties which include suit for permanent injunction filed by me regarding the house in which I am living, suit for eviction filed by Shri Ashok Sehdev, father of Dr. Deepak Sehdev, a divorce petition filed by Dr. Deepak Sehdev, FIR lodged by me under Section 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code at Panchkula, application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Panchkula, petition for custody of child filed by Dr. Deepak Sehdev at Amritsar and a criminal complaint filed by Dr. Deepak Sehdev against me at Amritsar which is subject matter of Criminal Miscellaneous No.4862-M of 2007. Now, after the intervention of some well- wishers we have settled our entire disputes amicably on the condition that as a final settlement for permanent alimony for me and for maintenance of my child Dr. Deepak Sehdev will pay a sum of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -4- twenty one lakh only) by way of demand draft in my name and in addition to that I will be permitted to take household articles including refrigerator, T.V., furniture etc. from house No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula where I am living now. I undertake to vacate the house No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula and hand over the possession of the same to Shri Ashok Sehdev on receipt of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only). In case some reasonable time is required for shifting to new accommodation, the same be granted. The permanent custody of the child shall remain with me for which Dr. Deepak Sehdev will not have any objection or claim at any stage in future. The petition filed for divorce by Dr. Deepak Sehdev, which is pending before the District Judge, Chandigarh shall be converted into a petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. I shall have no objection for quashing of FIR No.121 dated 20th June, 2004 registered at Police Station Chandi Mandir. I will withdraw the suit filed by me for permanent injunction regarding House No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula and the petition filed for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is also agreed between the parties that even any other litigation initiated by me shall be disposed of as compromised in terms of settlement arrived at today. It is also understood between the parties that they will not indulge each other any litigation in future. xxxx Statement of Dr. Deepak Sehdev (Hindu by religion) son of Shri Ashok Sehdev, aged 34 years, resident of House No.2, Vikas Nagar, Amritsar. I was married with Dr. Ritu Bhandari on 26th January, 2000. Because of certain differences we could not live together. Now we are living separately since 19th June, 2004. Thereafter, there had been a lot of litigation Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -5- between the parties which include suit for permanent injunction filed by Dr. Ritu Bhandari regarding the house in which she is living, suit for eviction filed by my father Shri Ashok Sehdev, a divorce petition filed by me, FIR lodged by Dr. Ritu Bhandari under Section 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code at Panchkula, application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Panchkula filed by Dr. Ritu Bhandari, petition for custody of child filed by me at Amritsar and a criminal complaint filed by me against Dr. Ritu Bhandari at Amritsar which is subject matter of Criminal Miscellaneous No.4862-M of 2007. Now, after the intervention of some well-wishers we have settled our entire disputes amicably on the condition that as a final settlement for permanent alimony for Dr. Ritu Bhandari and the maintenance of minor child I shall deposit a demand draft of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only) with the court in the name of Dr. Ritu Bhandari and in addition to that I have no objection if she takes house hold articles including refrigerator, T.V., furniture etc. to the place she will shift after vacating house No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula. The petition filed for divorce by me at which is pending before the District Judge, Chandigarh shall be converted into a petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. She will withdraw the suit filed by her for permanent injunction regarding House No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula and the petition filed for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. I will have no objection for quashing of complaint filed by me in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar titled as Dr. Deepak Sehdev Vs. Dr. Ritu Bnhandari for offences under Sections 452,323,497,427,506,34 of Indian Penal Code. I will have no claim or right for the custody of the child born out of the wedlock on 10th December, 2001. It is also agreed between the parties that even any other Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -6- litigation initiated by me shall be disposed of as compromised in terms of settlement arrived at today. I shall deposit a demand draft of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only) with the Court in the name of Dr. Ritu Bhandari which shall be handed over to her after the settlement of entire litigation pending before various courts and passing of decree of divorce. It is also understood between the parties that they will not indulge each other in any litigation in future. xxxx Order passed by this Court on March 25, 2008:- Statements of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 have been recorded separately today whereby they have agreed to settle their dispute finally in terms of the conditions mentioned therein on payment of a sum of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only) by respondent No.1 to petitioner No.1. The hearing of the case is adjourned to 08.4.2008 to enable respondent No.1 to submit the demand draft of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only) with the Court in the name of petitioner No.1. As the dispute between the parties has been settled, further proceedings before the Trial Court shall remain stayed.” In terms of the earlier order passed by this court on March 25, 2008, Dr. Deepak Sehdev handed over a demand draft for a sum of Rs.21 lakh to Dr. Ritu Bhandari, who was present in the court. In terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, on April 9, 2008 this court passed the following order:- Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -7- “On 25.03.2008, statements of Dr. Ritu Bhandari wife of Dr. Deepak Sehdev and Dr. Deepak Sehdev son of Shri Ashok Sehdev were recorded, in terms of which they had agreed to settle all their disputes. As per one of the condition of settlement, today a sum of Rs.21 lakh (Rupees twenty one lakh only) has been paid by Dr. Deepak Sehdev to Dr. Ritu Bhandari by way of Demand Draft No.127592, dated 05.04.2008 for Rs. 9,00,000/-, No.127593, dated 05.04.2008 for Rs.6,00,000/-, No.976322, dated 05.04.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/- and No.976329, dated 07.04.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/- drawn on Punjab National Bank, Chandigarh, which have been handed over to Dr. Ritu Bhandari, who is present in person in Court. In terms of the settlement, the parties had agreed to withdraw all the pending litigations initiated by them against each other. The detail of which is as under:- i) Petition filed by Dr. Deepak Sehdev for custody of the minor child born out of the wedlock, which is pending at Amritsar shall be withdrawn by Dr. Deepak Sehdev as it was agreed upon between the parties that the custody of the minor child will remain with Dr. Ritu Bhandari. However, the same is subject to the condition that Dr. Ritu Bhandari has undertaken that she will not part with the company/custody of the child born out of the wedlock to any person and in case such a situation arises in future, Dr. Deepak Sehdev will have first right to retain the custody of the child. ii) A petition for eviction of Dr. Ritu Bhandari from House No.491, Sector-25, Panchkula pending at Panchkula filed by the father of Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -8- Dr. Deepak Sehdev shall be withdrawn by him. iii) Dr. Deepak Sehdev shall have no objection to the quashing of the criminal complaint filed by him before learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar regarding which present petition as well as Criminal Misc. No.48612-M of 2007 is pending before this Court. iv) Petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by Dr. Deepak Sehdev pending at Chandigarh shall be converted into a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce by mutual consent for which both the parties will move joint application. v) Dr. Ritu Bhandari will have no objection to the quashing of FIR No.121 registered under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station Chandi Mandir, Panchkula against Dr. Deepak Sehdev and others. vi) A petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by Dr. Ritu Bhandari shall be withdrawn by her as she has already received a sum of Rs.21 lakh as permanent alimony for her and the minor child. vii) A suit for permanent injunction with regard to House No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula filed by Dr. Ritu Bhandari at Panchkula shall be withdrawn by her. The entire exercise of withdrawal of the suit, petitions by both the parties shall be completed on or before the next date of hearing fixed before this Court. The learned Court, where the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by Dr. Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -9- Deepak Sehdev is pending and which is now to be converted into a petition under Section 13-B of the Act, shall condone the mandatory period of six months as provided for under the Act for grant of divorce by mutual consent for the reasons that admittedly the parties in the present case are living separate since 19.06.2004 finding no chance of settlement. They have decided to separate and a sum of Rs.21 lakh as permanent alimony has already been paid by Dr. Deepak Sehdev to Dr. Ritu Bhandari. Dr. Ritu Bhandari who is in possession of House No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula, shall hand over the physical possession thereof to Dr. Deepak Sehdev or his father Shri Ashok Sehdev on or before the next date of hearing fixed before this Court. The present petition is adjourned to 21.05.2008 to enable the parties to complete the entire process regarding withdrawal of various litigations in terms of the details mentioned above.” In terms of the above order the parties were to take steps to withdraw various proceedings initiated by them before the next date. Today the parties are present in court. Certified copies of following orders passed by different courts bringing to an end to the proceedings initiated by the parties have been placed on record:- Sr. No. Name of the parties Nature of case/ under Sections Pending before the Court Date of order 1 Dr. Deepak Sehdev Vs. Dr. Kiran Sehdev Petition u/s 25 of Guardian & Wards Act for custody of minor child namely Master Prenav Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar 16.04.2008 2 Ashok Sehdev Vs. Smt. Kiran Sehdev and another Suit for possession by way of ejectment from House No.491, Sec.25, Panchkula. Civil Judge (Senior Division) Panchkula 16.04.2008 3 Smt. Kiran Sehdev and another Vs. Deepak Sehdev Petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula 21.04.2008 Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -10- Sr. No. Name of the parties Nature of case/ under Sections Pending before the Court Date of order 4 Smt. Kiran Sehdev and another Vs. Deepak Sehdev and another Suit for permanent injunction from dispos -sessing from H. No. 491, Sector- 25, Panchkula Civil Judge (Senior Division) Panchkula 17.04.2008 5 Dr. Deepak Sehdev and Dr. Kiran Sehdev Petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce by mutual consent. Additional District Judge, Chandigarh 05.05.2008 In addition to this, keys of house No.491, Sector 25, Panchkula have been handed over by Dr. Kiran Sehdev to Dr. Deepak Sehdev in Court today resultantly handing over vacant physical possession thereof. Dr. Kiran Sehdev shall have no right, title or interest in the above house in future. Learned counsel for the parties submit that as the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties have been complied with by both the parties. The amount undertaken to be paid by Dr. Deepak Sehdev, has already been paid. The proceedings initiated by parties against each other have been withdrawn and further a decree of divorce by mutual consent has also been passed dissolving the marriage of Dr. Deepak Sehdev with Dr. Kiran Sehdev @ Ritu Bhandari. In this factual matrix, relying upon the five Judge Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh V. State of Punjab, 2007(3) Law Herald (P & H) 2225 the prayer is for quashing of complaints and the FIRs, as are impugned in the bunch of the present petitions. While dealing with issue of quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise a Bench consisting of five Hon'ble Judges of this Court in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra) while approving minority view in Dharambir v. State of Haryana, 2005(2) Law Herald (P&H) (FB) 723, opined as under:- Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -11- “27. To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482, of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., “to prevent abuse of the process of any Court” or “to secure the ends of justice”. 28. In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney Versus Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, (1980) 1 S.C.C. 63, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words:- “The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” 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. 29. No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 30. 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 reduces friction, then it Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -12- 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 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. 31. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. 32. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -13- and ever-lasting congeniality in society. 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.” Compromise in modern society is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. As observed by Krishna Iyer J., the finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion. Inherent power of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C is not limited to matrimonial cases alone. The Court has wide powers to quash the proceedings even in non- compoundable offences in order to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure ends of justice, notwithstanding bar under Section 320 Cr.P.C. Exercise of power in a given situation will depend on facts of each case. The duty of the Court is not only to decide a lis between the parties after a protracted litigation but it is a vital and extra-ordinary instrument to maintain and control social order. Resolution of dispute by way of compromise between two warring groups should be encouraged unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of society or would promote savagery, as held in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra). Keeping in view the enunciation of law as referred to above and applying the same to the facts and circumstances of the present case, once the matter has been compromised between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding with the prosecution. Accordingly, Criminal complaint filed on 10.08.2006, titled as Dr. Deepak Sehdev Vs. Dr. Ritu Bhandari and others pending in the Court of learned Judicial Criminal Misc. No. 29722-M of 2007 -14- Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar and FIR No.121 dated 20.06.2004, under Sections 406, 498-A and 298 IPC registered at Police Station Chandimandir, District Panchkula and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. The petitions are disposed of accordingly. May 21, 2008. (RAJESH BINDAL) asija JUDGE