SAHIL SHAHI AND ANOTHER 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 2025-08-13. SAHIL SHAHI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 258 CRM-M-16061-2025 Date of decision : 13. 08. 2025 Sahil Shahi and Anr. ...... Petitioners V/S State of Punjab and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Ms. Kashish Sahni, Advocate for Mr. Vansh Chawla, Advocate for petitioners. Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Lokesh Vohra, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioners – Sahil Shahi and Rajinder Shahi @ Rajinder Kumari have filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 32 dated 20. 02. 2024, registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 120-B of IPC 1860 at Police Station Samrala, District Khanna (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners, in light of the compromise effected between the parties (Annexure P-2). 2. As per facts of the case, complainant/respondent No.
2 Ruby Sofat Shahi filed written complaint against her husband Sahil Shahi and other members of in-laws family for causing harassment on account of demand for dowry. She alleged that her marriage was performed with Sahil Shahi on 23. 08. 2020. It was the second marriage of Sahil Shahi. One week before marriage, Sahil Shahi and his parents started raising demand for dowry. Her family was forced to accept the said illegal demands of her husband. Her parents had spent Rs. 2,00,000/- on marriage. The complainant has given detail of gold ornaments and other articles given at the time of marriage. She faced continuous harassment and abuses in the matrimonial home. She tried to adjust in the matrimonial home but there was no change in their attitude. She has narrated various incidents which took place in the matrimonial home from time to time. Finally, she filed this complaint and on the basis of enquiry, present FIR has been registered. 3.
Petitioners filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 24. 03. 2025, petitioners 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 Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala dated 09. 05. 2025. Statement of respondent No. 2 has been recorded where she confirmed the compromise with petitioners. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence and she has no objection regarding quashing of FIR. 4. Petitioners- Sahil Shahi and Rajinder Shahi @ Rajinder Kumari also confirmed this fact in their joint statement. Statement of ASI Jarnail Singh is also recorded who confirmed that petitioners are not involved or declared as proclaimed offenders in any other criminal case. 5.
Therefore, from the report of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala 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 have filed joint petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Matter has been settled in Rs. 11,50,000/-. Thereafter, they will be able to live independently 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 petitioners is accepted and FIR No. 32 dated 20. 02. 2024, registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 120-B of IPC 1860 at Police Station Samrala, District Khanna (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arisen therefrom are quashed qua petitioners. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 13. 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.