Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2143 (HP)

Saurav Palta v. State Of H P

2018-12-03

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

body2018
JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 20 of 2014 dated 25.1.2014 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code at P.S. Nalagarh, District Solan on the basis of amicable settlement arrived at between parties, which has been reduced into writing and placed on record with this petition as Annexure P-3. 2. Today petitioner No.1(accused-husband) and respondent No.2 (complainant-wife), duly identified by their respective counsel, are present in Court and their separate statements on oath have been recorded, wherein all terms and conditions of compromise mutually accepted by them, have been endorsed. 3. Petitioner No.1, in his statement, has stated that his marriage with respondent No. 2 Deepika was solemnized on 18.7.2010 and out of the said wedlock, they were blessed with a daughter, Saavi, but, bitterness in their relations resulted into lodging of FIR No. 20 of 2014 dated 25.1.2014 by respondent No.2 against petitioners in P.S. Nalagarh, District Solan and also filing of complaint by respondent No. 2 under the Domestic Violence Act against him wherein an order was passed against him under Sections 12 and 19 of the Domestic Violence Act by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh which was assailed by him in an appeal and during pendency of the said appeal, before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan camp at Nalagarh, matter has been compromised between the parties and the said compromise has been reduced into writing and the said appeal was disposed of as compromised vide order 8.6.2018, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Solan camp at Nalagarh. 4. It is also stated by petitioner-husband that as per this compromise, he has agreed to pay Rs.6 lacs to respondent No. 2 in lieu of maintenance of respondent No. 2/wife along with the maintenance of their minor daughter and respondent No.2 has also agreed for accepting the said lump-sum amount against maintenance for her and their daughter, out of which Rs.3 lacs was paid by him on 8.6.2018 and remaining Rs.3 lacs has been paid by him today to respondent No.2 in the Court by handing over draft No. 106954 worth Rs. 3 lacs to be drawn at Oriental Bank of Commerce, Dharampur Branch, Ludhiana photocopy whereof has also been placed on record. 5. 3 lacs to be drawn at Oriental Bank of Commerce, Dharampur Branch, Ludhiana photocopy whereof has also been placed on record. 5. Petitioner No.1/husband has also stated that so far as the inheritance right of minor daughter Saavi is concerned, that will remain intact, but at present he is not owner in possession of any property, however, his daughter will have inheritance right as per law in the property in his ownership and possession. Besides making statement on oath to this effect he has also filed an affidavit in this Court. It is also stated by him that in terms of compromise, complaint under the Domestic Violence Act was closed and respondent No. 2 has also agreed to withdraw the FIR in the present case and compound the matter and he has also withdrawn the application/petition filed by him for the custody of daughter in the Court of District Judge/Guardian Judge, Ludhiana under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (32 of 1956) and Sections 8, 12 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act (8 of 1990). He has also stated that he and respondent No. 2 have also agreed to file a petition for divorce on mutual consent, which stands filed before learned District Judge, Solan, which is now pending before learned Additional District Judge, Solan camp at Nalagarh and is fixed for 7.1.2019 on which date his statement is to be recorded. Therefore, he has prayed for allowing the present petition preferred for compounding the matter and quashing FIR No. 20 of 2014 and consequential proceedings initiated against the petitioners, in pursuant thereto pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh. He has stated that he is making this statement with his free consent and will and also without any threat, coercion or pressure etc. 6. Respondent No.2-wife, in her statement, endorsing the deposition of petitioner No.1 to be true has further stated that so far as the property owned and possessed by petitioner No.1 Saurav Palta at present or to be owned in future is concerned, right of her daughter was neither relinquished by her nor she is competent to relinquish it in the interest of minor and therefore, it was not mentioned in compromise Annexure P-3. Petitioner has also endorsed this version by filing an affdavit and also in his deposition recorded on oath today in the Court. 7. Petitioner has also endorsed this version by filing an affdavit and also in his deposition recorded on oath today in the Court. 7. It is further stated by respondent No. 2 that in pursuant to compromise, she had agreed to close the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and they (petitioner No. 1 and she) have also filed petition for mutual divorce and in pursuant to compromise, she intends to withdraw FIR No. 20 of 2014 lodged by her against the petitioners for closing the criminal proceedings pending before the learned trial Court in pursuant to the said FIR. Respondent No. 2 has also endorsed that she has compromised the matter and has deposed in Court out of her free consent, will and without any threat, coercion or pressure. 8. The offences involved in the present case are compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C. either by the complainant or by the consent of complainant with permission of the Court. The Apex Court in Narinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. , (2014) 6 SCC 466 , and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. , (2012) 10 SCC 303 , has held that by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in appropriate case, even in non- compoundable offences, FIR or criminal proceedings can be quashed and set aside. In the present case, all offences are compoundable and further the registration of FIR has arisen on account of matrimonial dispute which stand amicably settled between the parties and complainant has agreed for withdrawal of complaint for quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings pending against the accused person. 9. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances before allowing the petition, it is clarified that so far as inheritance right of minor daughter of petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 is concerned, it has neither been relinquished nor could have been relinquished and besides having right in property of mother, in accordance with prevailing law she will also have every right in the property of petitioner as his daughter in accordance with law. 10. 10. In view of above, as the matter stands amicably settled between the parties in the aforesaid terms, and also in terms contained in their statements and compromise Annexure P-3 which shall also be part of this judgment and accordingly FIR No. 20 of 2014 dated 25.1.2014 registered under Section 498-A, 406, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code at P.S. Nalagarh and proceedings initiated in pursuant thereto are quashed and set aside. Consequently trial pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh in aforesaid case FIR No. 20 of 2014 also stands closed. Petition is allowed in aforesaid terms.