Deepak Kumar Malhotra vs State of Punjab and Another

Rekha Mittal, J.—Through the present petition filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No. 129 dated 04.04.2009 u/s 406, 498-A, 506, 323, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines Amritsar and proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. In the instant case, a matrimonial discord between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 led to filing of the present FIR. According to counsel for the petitioner, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties as respondent No. 2 is happily living with her husband Deepak Kumar Malhotra.

Vide this Court''s order dated 27.05.2013, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court to get their respective statements recorded. Simultaneously, the Trial Court was also directed to submit its report with regard to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Now, in compliance thereto, a report has been received from the trial Court, stating therein that the parties have made an amicable settlement and have recorded their statements in the Court without any fear or pressure. As per the statement of Nisha wife of the petitioner recorded before the trial court, she has settled the matter with her husband and presently she is living with her husband. She has no objection, if the present FIR against her husband may be quashed and the P.O. proceeding against her husband may also be cancelled.

Counsel for the State of Punjab has not disputed genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties in view of the report furnished by the trial Court. However, he has submitted that the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender, which disentitles him to seek indulgence of this Court.

Counsel for respondent No. 2 has also not disputed the factual position.

In respect of a person, who has been declared proclaimed offender, the FIR is not normally quashed. Since, in the present case, the parties have resolved their matrimonial differences amicably and respondent No. 2 is happily residing with her husband in her matrimonial home, the mere fact that the petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender should not be allowed to come in the way to quash the proceedings.

In this regard, reference can be made to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Sudo Mandal @ Diwarak Mandal Vs. State of Punjab, . In this case, out of five accused, in a murder case, three were declared as proclaimed offenders and two accused arrested and sent up for trial, were convicted by the trial Court, but acquitted in an appeal by this court. This Court quashed the proceedings against absconding proclaimed offenders in exercise of power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. with the observations that it would be empty formality to send them for trial on same unbelievable and untrustworthy evidence which would ultimately lead to their acquittal. Similarly, in Balbir Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, , this Court allowed quashing of proceedings of a criminal case at the behest of accused, who has been declared as proclaimed offender by holding that the dispute is primarily civil in nature and the factum of the petitioner being declared as proclaimed offender should not create any impediment in the way to quash the proceedings.

A perusal of the allegations of the FIR in the instant case reveals that the present case squarely falls in that category of cases which can be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its inherent power u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

Keeping in view the authoritative enunciation of law laid down by this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, and Hon''ble the Supreme Court in '' Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, and in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case coupled with genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties as reported by the trial Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings are put to an end. In this view of the matter, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 129 dated 04.04.2009 under Sections 406, 498-A, 506, 323, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines Amritsar and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.