HARINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2025-08-20. HARINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 293 CRM-M-32226-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 20. 08. 2025 Harinder Singh ...... Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Karan Singla, Advocate for petitioner. Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Malvi Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner – Harinder Singh has filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 0086 dated 12. 06. 2024, registered under Section 498-A of IPC 1860 at Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner, in light of the compromise effected between the parties dated 02. 06. 2025 (Annexure P-3). 2. As per facts of the case, complainant/respondent No.
2 Jaspreet Kaur filed written complaint against her husband Harinder Singh and other members of in-laws family alleging that her marriage was solemnized on 30. 10. 2014 with Harinder Singh according to Sikh Rites. They lived together as husband and wife. Her parents had spent money on marriage according to their status. After sometime, her in-laws started harassing her for bringing less dowry. Respectables had collected several times but there was no change in their behaviour. Before marriage, it was decided that her husband will take her along with him to England. He took her to England only once on visitor visa. Her husband threatened her that in case, she stayed in England he would kill her. She came to her in-laws house. Her in-laws started harassing her and finally, she came to her parental house. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered. 3. Petitioner filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 01. 07.
2025, petitioner and respondent No. 2 were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements on the basis of compromise. Detailed report regarding compromise has been received from the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dhuri dated 04. 07. 2025. Statement of respondent No. 2 has been recorded where she confirmed the compromise with petitioner. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence and she has no objection regarding quashing of FIR. Learned counsel representing State has filed status report, which is taken on record. 4. Petitioner-Harinder Singh also confirmed this fact in his statement. Statement of L/ASI Gurdev Kaur is also recorded who confirmed that petitioner is not involved or declared as proclaimed offender in any other criminal case. 5.
Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dhuri, it is clear that the compromise has been effected between the parties without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, which is acceptable to both the parties. They have mutually settled all their claims arisen from matrimonial dispute. They will be able to live in peace and harmony. It will end the litigation started between them. 6. Gainful reference can be made to the judgment of Larger Bench of Five Judges of this High Court cited in 2007(3) R. C. R. (Criminal) 1052 titled as “Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. ”, where it was explained that ‘there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the court to exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the section itself i. e. to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. ’ 7.
Therefore, by relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid judgment, no purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. Considering these facts, the petition filed by the petitioner is accepted and FIR No. 0086 dated 12. 06. 2024, registered under Section 498-A of IPC 1860 at Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arisen therefrom are quashed qua petitioner. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 20. 08. 2025. Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.