CRM-M-9023-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 269 CRM-M-9023-2025 Date of decision : 06.08.2025 Gurarpan Singh and Anr. ...... Petitioners V/S State of Punjab and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, Assistant A.G., Punjab. Mr. Joginder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Supneet Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioners – Gurarpan Singh and Satnam Kaur have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing complaint bearing No.CRL No.100 dated 07.11.2015, COMI/00829/2015, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 of IPC (Annexure P-1) and the summoning order dated 02.01.2018 (Annexure P-2) and all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure P-3). 2. As per facts of the case, complainant/respondent No.2 Harjinder Kaur filed complaint against her husband, Gurarpan Singh, and others under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 & 34 of IPC (Annexure P-1), with the allegations that her marriage was performed with Gurarpan Singh on 18.10.2013. Her parents had given dowry as per their demand. They had spent Rs.7 Lacs on her marriage. She had given details of dowry articles given at the time of marriage. On reaching the matrimonial home, she realized that it was a joint family and overall control was of Charanjit Kaur (Chachi Saas) and her husband Jang Bahadur Singh (Chacha Sohra). All her SUNIL DEVI 2025.08.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9023-2025 -2- dowry articles were retained by them. She was not permitted to use her dowry articles. She repeatedly requested them to give her dowry articles but they refused. They started harassing and humiliating her. Nobody listened to her in the matrimonial home. She was abused and illtreated. She narrated the acts of cruelty to her parents. She tried to adjust in the matrimonial home. In the complaint, she has narrated various incidents. Panchayats were also convened but the accused persons refused to return her dowry articles and finally the complaint was filed. After recording of pre-summoning evidence, Gurarpan Singh and Satnam Kaur were ordered to be summoned under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 of IPC vide summoning order dated 02.01.2018 (Annexure P-2). Learned counsel representing State filed status report, which is taken on record. 3. Petitioners filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 12.05.2025, 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 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana dated 11.06.2025. 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- Gurarpan Singh and Satnam Kaur also confirmed this fact in their separate statements. As per the report, petitioners were declared proclaimed offenders vide order dated 20.01.2020 and 03.07.2023 respectively. Thereafter, they filed anticipatory bail applications and the same were allowed vide order dated SUNIL DEVI 2025.08.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9023-2025 -3- 23.12.2024 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ludhiana (Annexure P-4). 5. Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana 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.8,50,000/-. 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 tilted 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 complaint bearing No.CRL No.100 dated 07.11.2015, COMI/00829/2015, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 of IPC (Annexure P-1) and the summoning order dated 02.01.2018 (Annexure P-2) and all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 06.08.2025. Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SUNIL DEVI 2025.08.08 10:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document