Sikandar Khan vs State of Punjab and Another

Nirmaljit Kaur, J.

Crl. Misc. No. 16992 of 2011

This is an application u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for placing on record Annexures 3 and 4, additional affidavits of petitioner and respondent No. 2.

Annexures 3 and 4, additional affidavits of petitioner and respondent No. 2 are taken on record.

Crl. Misc. Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Crl. Misc. No. M-1341 of 2011

The FIR, in question, was got registered by respondent No. 2 with the allegation that she was threatened by her husband that he will commit suicide by consuming poison and will implicate her in a case. However, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectables of the area.

The parties are present in the Court along with their respective counsel. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 has placed on record the affidavit of respondent No. 2 admitting the factum of compromise. As per the said affidavit, the respondent No. 2 has no objection, if the FIR, in question, is quashed. Additional affidavits of petitioner and respondent No. 2 have also been filed to the effect that both the Petitioner, as well as, respondent No. 2 are residing together happily as husband and wife along with their only child. The present FIR arises out of the matrimonial dispute. The matter having been compromised, it is fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the FIR.

The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2007(3) RCR 1052 has held that the compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under:

The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Code of Criminal Procedure which can affect the inherent power of this Court u/s 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar u/s 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:

We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.

In the present case, the dispute arises out of the matrimonial dispute. The same has been compromised. In view of the settled position of law, it would be just and proper to quash the FIR for peace, harmony and thus allow the parties to move on in life.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 133 dated 11.09.2007 under Sections 309/506 Indain Penal Code registered at Police Station Ahmedgarh, District Sangrur and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed in the interest of justice.