Ramandeep Kaur vs State of Punjab

S.S. Saron, J.—Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has filed affidavit of Sukhdev Singh-respondent No. 2 in Court today. The same is taken on record. The petition has been filed by the petitioners u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.-for short) seeking quashing of FIR No. 89 dated 29.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) registered at police station Ghall Khurd, District Ferozepur, for the offences under Sections 452, 324, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC-for short).

Respondent No. 2-Sukhdev Singh lodged the impugned FIR against the petitioners. It is admitted case that Ramandeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1 is the wife of Ramandeep Singh, who is a nephew of Sukhdev Singh. There was matrimonial dispute between Ramandeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1 and nephew of the complainant Sukhdev Singh (respondent No. 2) namely Ramandeep Singh. Petitioners No. 2 and 3 are the mother and brother respectively of Ramandeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1. The matrimonial dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and Ramandeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1 and Ramandeep Singh, nephew of the complainant, have made their statements at the second motion in CM No. 24166-CII of 2013, which is a joint petition for divorce filed in this Court in FAO No. M-191 of 2013. In the said case, Sukhdev Singh (respondent No. 2 herein) has also made a statement on 30.06.2014, inter alia, stating that in view of the compromise, FIR No. 89 dated 29.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) registered at police station Ghall Khurd, District Ferozepur, against the petitioners may be quashed.

Ms. Manisha Gandhi, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for the State, on instructions from HC Balbir Singh, Police Station Ghall Khurd, has submitted that two witnesses in the case have been recorded. It is, however, submitted that since the matrimonial dispute has been compromised, the FIR may be quashed in view of the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in case B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another,

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter.

There is no objection to the quashing of the FIR by the complainant. The complainant has made a statement in the joint petition for divorce between Ramandeep Kaur-petitioner No. 1 and Ramandeep Singh, his nephew, that he has no objection in case the impugned FIR is quashed.

The Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi''s case (supra) has held 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 Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers of the High Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 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 having been compounded.

In view of the above decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, there should be an endeavour on the part of the Court to amicably resolve the dispute. The dispute having been amicably resolved, it would be just and expedient to quash the FIR.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 89 dated 29.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) registered at Police Station Ghall Khurd, District Ferozepur, for the offences under Sections 452, 324, 148, 149 IPC and all consequential and subsequent proceedings in pursuance thereof shall stand quashed.