IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 17.03.2025 Ravi Kumar and Anr.

...... Petitioners V/S State of Haryana and Anr.

..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Reetesh Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Atul Ravish, Advocate for petitioners.

Ms. Nidhi Garg, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Vikalp Hooda, Advocate for Mr. Nishant Hooda, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioners- Ravi Kumar and Pano Devi have filed instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.493 dated 12.08.2021 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 of IPC, registered at Police Station Krishna Gate, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

2. As per the facts of the case, complainant Muskan filed written complaint alleging that earlier she had filed a complaint to Police Station Krishna Gate for necessary action. However, Panchayat was convened in the presence of respectables from both sides where accused admitted their mistake. They assured that they will take good care of her. She returned to the matrimonial home but again she was given beating on account of demand of dowry. She was again turned out of the matrimonial home by giving beating. With these allegations, present FIR was registered.

3. Petitioners filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 22.01.2025, petitioners and respondent No.2 were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements on the basis of compromise. Detailed report regarding compromise has been received from the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra dated 13.02.2025. Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded, where she confirmed the compromise with petitioner. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected voluntarily and she has no objection regarding quashing of FIR.

4. Petitioners- Ravi Kumar and Pano Devi also confirmed this fact in their separate statements. Statement of ASI Santosh is also recorded who further confirmed that accused are not involved or declared as proclaimed offenders in any other criminal case.

5. Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra, it is clear that compromise has been effected between the parties without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. They have mutually settled all their claims arisen from matrimonial dispute. They have decided to part ways by filing joint petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Matter has been settled in Rs.95,000/- out of which Rs.50,000/- are to be paid by petitioners to complainant at the time of recording of first motion statements, and balance amount of Rs.45,000/- will be paid at the time of recording of second motion statements. Thereafter, they will be able to live independently in peace and harmony. No purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings.

6. Gainful reference can be made to the judgment of Larger Bench of Five Judges of this High Court cited in 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052 tilted as Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., where it was explained 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 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.’

7. Therefore, by relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid judgment, no purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. Considering these facts, the petition filed by the petitioners is accepted and FIR No.493 dated 12.08.2021 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 of IPC, registered at Police Station Krishna Gate, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra and all subsequent proceedings ari