IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 23362 of 2008 Date of decision: January 13, 2009 Hari Chand and Others ….. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ….. Respondents Present: Mr. Gopal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person. *** S.S. SARON, J. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“CrPC” – for short) has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No.311 dated 23.8.2008 (Annexure P1) registered at Police Station Division No.6, Ludhiana for the offences under Sections 498-A and 120-B Indian Penal Code (“IPC”- for short) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of mutual agreement/compromise dated 4.9.2008 (Annexure P-2). The marriage of Smt. Priyanka Jai Singh @ Poonam (respondent No.2) was solemnized with Parveen Kumar @ Parveen Jai Singh (petitioner No.3) on 30.1.2004 at Ludhiana. After marriage some disputes and temperamental differences arose between the complainant (respondent No.2) and petitioner No.3. Despite efforts made by the relatives to resolve the same, the disputes remained. The complainant (respondent No.2) lodged the impugned FIR dated 23.8.2008 (Annexure P1) against her father-in-law (petitioner No.1), mother-in-law (petitioner No.2) and her husband (petitioner No.3). Crl. Misc. No. M- 23362 of 2008 [2] The matrimonial disputes between the complainant (respondent No.2) and petitioner No.3 have now been amicably resolved. Settlement deed dated 4.9.2008 (Annexure P2) has been recorded. The complainant and petitioner No.3 have mutually decided to part ways. The complainant (respondent No.2) is present in Court with her counsel and she has stated that she has already received a sum of Rs.3.20 lacs as maintenance and permanent alimony. It is also stated that she has no objection in case the impugned FIR dated 23.8.2008 (Annexure P1) is quashed in view of the compromise. It is also stated that she has compromised the matter of her own free will and without any kind of pressure or undue influence. In B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 it has held by the Supreme Court that in respect of matrimonial disputes, there should be an effort to encourage genuine settlements. Besides, it was held that quashing of criminal proceedings or FIR in the cases of matrimonial dispute is permissible and Section 320 CrPC does not limit or affect the powers of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC. Thus the High Court in exercise of its inherent power can quash the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint in the case of a matrimonial dispute. In the present case, the matrimonial dispute having been amicably settled, no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal prosecution. In view of the above, the Crl. Misc. petition is allowed and FIR No.311 dated 23.8.2008 (Annexure P1) registered at Police Station Division No.6, Ludhiana for the offences under Sections 498-A and 120-B IPC and all consequential and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom shall stand quashed. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE January 13, 2009 amit