Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.
Misc.
No.M-5816 of 2014 Date of decision: April 21, 2014 Jaspal Singh alias Pala .Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another .Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surinder Gupta Present: Petitioner in person with Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Advocate and Mr.Vivek Gupta, Advocate.
Mr.Varun Sharma, AAG, Punjab.
Ms.Daljit Kaur @ Manjit Kaur, Respondent in person.
Surinder Gupta, J The petitioners has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of the FIR No.131 dated 30.10.2003 (Annexure P-1).registered for offence under Sections 498-A IPC at Police Station Noormahal, District Jalandhar, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).The FIR was got registered on the statement of respondent No.2-Daljit Kaur @ Manjit Kaur, wherein she levelled allegations of demand of dowry and maltreatment by the petitioner.
Upon notice, Mr.Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State and respondent No.2-Daljit Kaur @ Manjit Kaur appeared in person.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
It is a matrimonial dispute.
The marriage of the parties took place on 16.1.1997.
It has been submitted that with the intervention of the relatives and friends, the matter has been settled .
The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded.
The court concerned has sent its report dated 31.3.2014 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature Kumar Deepak 2014.04.28 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.
Misc.
No.M-5816 of 2014 -2- and without any pressure or influence.
The respondent No.2-complainant who is present in person has submitted that in view of the compromise (Annexure P/2).she has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P/1) is quashed.
Learned State counsel has also not disputed the compromise (Annexure P/2).The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for quashing the impugned FIR is that the offence under Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable.
In case Kulwinder Singh versus State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, Full Bench of this Court has held that the FIR can be quashed on the basis of the compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.even if the offence is not compoundable.
Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed.
Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice.
The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties to this petition but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.
The offence in this case is not so heinous or serious that it cannot be settled by the parties through compromise.
In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is quashed.
April 21, 2014 (Surinder Gupta) deepak Judge Kumar Deepak 2014.04.28 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document