Major Singh and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.—Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 20, dated 4.4.2011, under Sections 406 and 498-A, IPC, registered at Police Station, Phase XI, District Mohali, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the investigation and the present petition, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, where due to persuasion of the Mediator better sense has prevailed and the private parties decided to effect a compromise. He further submits that as per the terms and conditions of the compromise, two cheques of Rs. 5,00,000/- each and one cheque of Rs. 6,00,000/-, were handed over to the complainant-respondent No. 2 and out of them one cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- has already been encashed by respondent No. 2. He further submits that due to some controversy the second cheque could not be encashed and, hence, the matter was placed before this Court. He also contends that today respondent No. 2 has once again suffered her statement with regard to the compromise and the terms and conditions of the compromise have been incorporated in the said statement. He also contends that he has sought instructions from the petitioners to accept the terms and conditions of the compromise as deposed by respondent No. 2 in her statement today before this Court. He also contends that in view of the compromise so effected and the statement suffered by respondent No. 2, the pendency of the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law, as the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence of the petitioners are bleak. To buttress his submission, learned counsel has made a reference to the judgment delivered by Hon''ble the Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another,

Learned counsel for the State very fairly concedes that the present criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute. He further submits that in view of the statements suffered by the complainant-respondent No. 2 and the learned counsel for the petitioners today in this Court, amicably settling their disputes, he has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Learned Amicus Curiae representing the complainant-respondent No. 2 very fairly submits that the complainant has suffered her statement before this Court today on oath and she will remain bound by the terms and conditions as stated by her. He further submits that he has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed in view of the compromise. However, he submits that in case the petitioners fail to comply with the agreed terms and conditions, in that eventuality the complainant-respondent No. 2 be relegated to move an application for revival of the present petition.

Heard.

The present criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute. Petitioner No. 1, Major Singh, who is husband of the complainant-respondent No. 2, is allegedly undergoing the treatment for Cancer. There is a minor child, aged about 7 years, out of this wedlock. Better sense has prevailed and petitioner No. 1 has effected a compromise with the complainant-respondent No. 2 on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the statement of the complainant-respondent No. 2, which has been suffered by her before this Court today. Learned Amicus Curiae, representing the complainant-respondent No. 2 has also heard the said statement and has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Learned counsel for the State, after hearing the statement suffered by the complainant-respondent No. 2 and that of the learned counsel for the petitioners, has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

From the above facts and circumstances of the case, the pendency of the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings would be sheer abuse of the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence of the petitioners are bleak.

Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the factum of the compromise effected between the private parties and the ratio of the judgment delivered by Hon''ble the Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No. 20, dated 4.4.2011, under Sections 406 and 498-A, IPC, registered at Police Station, Phase XI, District Mohali, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioners fail to honour the compromise, in such a situation the complainant-respondent No. 2 or the prosecution would be free to move an application for revival of the present petition. Similarly, in case the complainant-respondent No. 2 backs out from the statement suffered by her in the Court today, in that eventuality she will be bound to return the amount paid or to be paid by the petitioners to her. Further, it is also made clear that both the counsel representing the private parties shall fix up a date on which petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 shall come present personally in the District Court at S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, for filing of a petition in terms of Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.