CRM-M-21514-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 258 CRM-M-21514-2025 Date of decision : 09.07.2025 Shivam Dhuria and Anr. ...... Petitioners V/S State of Punjab and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. M.S.Toor, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Rashi Verma, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioners – Shivam Dhuria and Vijay Kumar have filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.54 dated 20.03.2023, registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 of IPC, at Police Station City Fazilka, District Fazilka (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners, in light of the compromise effected between the parties dated 01.04.2025 (Annexure P-3). 2. As per facts of the case, complainant Reena Rani filed written complaint against her husband Shivam Dhuria and other members of in-laws family for maltreatment on account of demand of dowry. She got married with Shivam Dhuria about 04 years ago. Her parents had given household articles at the time of marriage. After two months of her marriage, her husband and members of in-laws family started harassing her for dowry. They even gave her beating. Her husband was instigated by her father-in-law, as a result, she was beaten up every day, even during pregnancy. There was no change in their SUNIL DEVI 2025.07.11 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21514-2025 -2- behaviour. She was turned out of the house late night. Friend of her brother gave her some money and she came to her home at Fazilka. She stayed in her parental house for 1 ½ year and gave birth to a child. Nobody came to see the child. Matter was compromised with the intervention of respectables and she came back to her matrimonial home. Again, after few days there was demand of dowry and money. Her husband told her to go back to her parental house as he was not having money for her medical treatment. Her husband and in-laws family were invited on the opening ceremony of new house of her brother and on that occasion, there was demand for cash of Rs.51,000/-. She was illtreated by other members of in-laws family. The panchayat was also convened to settle the matter but it did not materialize. Ultimately, the complaint was filed and present FIR has been registered. 3. Petitioners filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 24.04.2025, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fazilka dated 23.05.2025. 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- Shivam Dhuria and Vijay Kumar also confirmed this fact in their joint statement. Statement of ASI Jaswant Singh is also recorded who confirmed that petitioners are not involved or declared as proclaimed offenders in any other criminal case. SUNIL DEVI 2025.07.11 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21514-2025 -3- 5. Therefore, from the report of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fazilka it is clear that compromise has been effected between the parties without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. They have mutually settled all their claims arisen from matrimonial dispute. They have decided to part ways and filed joint petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Thereafter, they will be able to live independently in peace and harmony. No purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. 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 FIR No.54 dated 20.03.2023, registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 of IPC, at Police Station City Fazilka, District Fazilka (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arisen therefrom are quashed qua petitioners. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 09.07.2025. Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SUNIL DEVI 2025.07.11 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document