Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.@mdashThis is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 115, dated 08.12.2010, under Sections 406 and 498A, IPC,
registered at Police Station, City Budhlada, District Mansa, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise.
Vide order dated 13.02.2012, this Court had directed the affected parties to appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, on
28.2.2012 for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The said court was also directed to send the detailed report in that
regard on or before the date fixed by this Court.
2. In compliance there of, statement of Meenu Rani-complainant and that of her father, Balbir Singh, were recorded. Meenu Rani stated that in
view of her future interest and cordial relations, the Panchayat of her village and her relatives had got the compromise effected with the petitioners
in the case arising out of FIR No. 115 dated 08.12.2010, under Sections 406 and 498A, IPC, Police Station, Budhlada. The said compromise
was effected with the petitioners with her free consent and without any undue influence or pressure. Therefore, she did not want to proceed with
the present case. Her father, Balbir Singh, also made statement on the similar line. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, also recorded the
statements of petitioners Ashok Kumar, Jeeta Singh, Sukhwinder Kaur and Leelawati. They too admitted the factum of compromise. Perusal of
the report submitted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, reveals that the compromise had been effected between the parties without
any coercion or any type of influence and the same was in the interest of both the parties.
3. Mr. S.S. Kainth, Advocate, representing respondent No. 2, has also admitted the factum of compromise. He further admits that respondent
No. 2 and her father, Balbir Singh, did appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa and got recorded their respective statements
with regard to the compromise. He also admits that respondent No. 2 has no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings are
quashed.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Sukhwinder Singh of Police Station Budhlada, District Mansa, admits the factum of
compromise. He has gone through the status report, sent by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, and after perusing the same, has no
objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has
brought to the notice of this Court that Ashok Kumar-petitioner and Meenu Rani-complainant/respondent No. 2 have obtained a decree of
divorce by mutual consent.
5. Heard.
6. This criminal litigation has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute. Due to intervention of relatives and respectable of the society, they have sorted
out their differences and effected a compromise. Petitioner-Ashok Kumar and complainant/respondent No. 2-Meenu Rani have obtained a decree
of divorce by mutual consent. The pendency of the present FIR and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be a sheer abuse of
the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction of the petitioners are bleak in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
Keeping in view the factum of compromise and the law laid down by Hon''ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and
another, 2003 (2) RCR (Criminal) 888, this petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No. 115, dated 08.12.2010, under Sections 406 and 498A,
IPC, registered at Police Station, City Budlada, District Mansa, and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.