1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.
Misc.
No.M-21362 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision : 06.05.2014 Sarbjit Kaur .....Petitioner versus Harwinder Kaur ..Respondent Crl.
Misc.
No.M-26412 of 2013(O&M) Jasvir Singh Sidhu and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ..Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY Present: Mr.Sunil Chadha, Senior Advocate with Mr.Rahul Bhargav, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Gazi Mohd., DAG Punjab Mr.D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for respondent No.2 -- ANITA CHAUDHRY, J.
The above-referred petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they are connected to each other.
Before proceeding further, few facts require a mention.
The marriage between petitioner Jasvir Singh Sidhu and respondent No.2 Harwinder Kaur was solemnized on 05.05.2003.
Sharma Jiten 2014.05.20 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh 2 There were temperamental differences and respondent No.2 launched criminal prosecution against her husband, father-in-law Manjit Singh Sidhu, mother-in-law Jaswant Kaur, sister-in-law Sarbjit Kaur and one Chamkaur Singh (petitioner No.5) who is father of Baljit Kaur (non-petitioner) alleged to be the second wife of Jasvir Singh, by way of FIR No.153 dated 14.10.2008, registered under Sections 406, 494 and 498-A IPC, Police Station Sidhwan Bet, District Ludhiana.
In that FIR, the investigating agency found Sarbjit Kaur, sister-in-law and Chamkaur Singh as innocent and presented the challan against the remaining four accused.
Dis-satisfied with the same, Harwinder Kaur filed a criminal complaint in the Court against all the six accused and on the basis of preliminary evidence led therein, the Court below summoned all the six accused arrayed therein for the commission of offense punishable unde Sections 406, 494, 498-A and 506 IPC read with Section 149 IPC vide order dated 28.10.2009.
Both the cases i.e.FIR as well as criminal complaint are stated to have been clubbed together.
The petitioner Sarbjit Kaur filed Crl.
Misc.
No.21362 of 2010 and sought quashing of the criminal complaint and subsequent proceedings conducted therein, including the summoning order.
Reply opposing the prayer was filed by the complainant.
Before the matter could be heard on merits, all the accused, except accused Baljit Kaur, who is stated to be abroad, Sharma Jiten 2014.05.20 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh 3 filed Crl.
Misc.
No.M-26412 of 2013 seeking quashing of the FIR No.153 dated 14.10.2008, as mentioned above, on the basis of compromise arrived between the parties.
Counsel for the parties have pointed out that the parties have put to rest all their disputes amicably.
As per the compromise, besides other terMs.it had been decided to withdraw all the cases pending against each other.
The married couple has also decided to part ways on certain terms and conditions as stipulated in compromise (Annexure P-2).Affidavit (Annexure P-3) of complainant Harwinder Kaur has also been annexed with the petition.
Report has also been received from the trial Court in Crl.
Misc.
No.26412 of 2013 after recording statements of the parties on compromise.
The Court below has reported that compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion.
Trial Court has also sent copy of statements of parties recorded by it.
It has further been pointed out that acting upon the compromise, the couple has filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Respondent No.2 has been paid whole of the amount, as undertaken in the compromise, by petitioner No.1 and nothing is due now.
Learned State counsel submits that except one Baljit Kaur, who is abroad, the petitioners are the only accused and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR.
Though, quashing of criminal complaint has been Sharma Jiten 2014.05.20 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh 4 sought only by petitioner Sarbjit Kaur, but considering the fact that the parties have compromised the matter and FIR as well as criminal complaint, which are based on the same set of events, have been clubbed together, no useful purpose would be served to keep the proceedings pending against the accused Jasvir Singh, Manjit Singh, Jaswant Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur and Chamkaur Singh.
In view of the statements made by the parties and the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh & ORS.versus State of Punjab & Anr.
2007(3) RCR(Crl.) 1052, approved by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh versus State of Punjab & ORS.2012(10) SCC303 the instant petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and the impugned complaint as well as consequent proceedings conducted therein qua Jasvir Singh, Manjit Singh, Jaswant Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur and Chamkaur Singh are quashed.
Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below.
May 06, 2014 (ANITA CHAUDHRY) Jiten JUDGE Sharma Jiten 2014.05.20 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh