The court can quash criminal proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties in a dispute with a civil flavor, as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT :

Through Video Conferencing

1. Initially the petitioners herein filed the instant petition under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of an FIR No. 21/2018 dated 24.12.2018 registered at Police Station Women Cell, Jammu, at the instance of respondent No. 4 against petitioners for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 109 RPC stating therein that petitioner No. 1 married respondent No. 4 on 11.03.2016 being a dowry less marriage and that soon after the marriage respondent No. 4 started harassing and humiliating the petitioner No. 1, pressurizing him to live separately from his old aged mother viz. petitioner No. 2 and that the respondent No. 4 succeeded in getting the petitioner No. 1 separated from petitioner No. 2 to live with respondent No. 4 away from his ancestral house at Pacca Danga, Jammu and despite that respondent No. 4 continued to humiliate and harass the petitioner No. 1 and ultimately respondent No. 4 sought divorce which the petitioner No. 1 refused resulting into institution of a petition under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act by the respondent No. 4 against the petitioners 1 to 3 before the Court of Sub Judge, Jammu.

2. It has been stated in the petition that petitioner No.3 came to be roped in the said proceedings by the respondent No. 4 even though she remained out of Jammu in USA for her studies and upon return there from has been living in Mumbai and not being a part of the joint family of the petitioners since many years and that the respondent No.4 in the FIR in question implicated the petitioner No. 3 with the intention to cause humiliation and defamation to her being the unmarried sister of the petitioner No. 1.

3. It has been further stated that the petitioner No. 4 being relative of the petitioner No. 1 (Bua) has also been implicated in the FIR in question despite the fact that she is an old aged lady putting up at Haryana and had no role in the matrimonial life of the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 4 and that the petitioner No. 4 as well came to be roped in by the respondent No. 4 in the FIR in question with the intention to humiliate and harass the petitioners. The FIR in question is stated to be based on concocted story aimed at to compel the petitioner No. 1 to give divorce to the respondent No.4.

4. Petitioners in the petition thus sought quashment of the FIR in question on multiple grounds enumerated therein the petition, while placing reliance on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as “R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab reported in AIR 1960 SC 866” and “State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 suppl. (1) SCC 335”.

5. During the pendency of the instant petition, the respondent No. 4 through her counsel on 01.09.2020 submitted that petitioner No.1 and respondent No. 4 have entered into a compromise and resolved their disputes.

6. On 06.10.2020 this Court passed an order while considering application being CrLM No. 864/2020 filed by the petitioners for placing on record the judgement and decree dated 06.07.2020 passed by the Additional District Judge (Matrimonial cases Jammu). In the application supra it had been prayed that the FIR in question be quashed on account of the compromise having been arrived at between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 4. Mr. Aseem Sawhney learned AAG appearing counsel for respondents 1 to 3 expressed no objection to the settlement of the petition in the light of averments made in the application, thus having regard to the compromise arrived at between the parties and the averments made in the application inasmuch, as respective submissions of the appearing counsels, in terms of order dated 06.10.2020 supra parties were directed to appear before the Registrar Judicial of this Court on 12.10.2020 for recording of their statements in support of the compromise before finally settling the petition.

7. In terms of order dated 18.11.2020, this Court directed the parties to