BALJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALJIT Singh, petitioner No. 1 was married to Smt. Inderjit Kaur on 30-3-1986. The couple lived together till February 19, 1987. No child was born. Thereafter, trouble started and there was civil and criminal litigation. The wife filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, She also lodged FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 Indian Penal Code against the husband at Police Station, Division No. 6, Industrial Area, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) on 24-7-1988. Also named in the FIR as accused were Kartar Singh, father (since dead); Dalbir Singh, brother; Nasib Kaur mother and Sunita Rani, brother's wife of the husband Baljit Singh. The aforesaid persons have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. for quashing the FIR and proceedings which have been taken on the basis thereof.

(2.) NO reply has been filed by the State. The facts averred in the petition having not been controverted are, therefore, taken to have been accepted for purposes of the present petition.

(3.) ONE of the primary grounds mentioned in the petition is that there was a compromise between the parties on 13-9-1988 through the intervention of several respectable well-wishers of the estranged couple. The compromise was reduced into writing and a copy thereof is Annexure P-7. According to this agreement, it was mutually decided to secure divorce. The parties applied under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act and obtained divorce through mutual consent under order of the District Judge, Ludhiana dated 1-4-1989. It was also stated in the agreement that the parties had exchanged all articles relating to dowry and Istri Dhan and the wife had obtained a bank draft of Rs. 40. 000/- in lieu of maintenance and all claims in that behalf. It was also recorded in the agreement that no dispute survived between the parties and that proceedings which were pending will be suitably got withdrawn or disposed of. An express reference was made to the case under Sections 406 and 498a IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in pursuance of the aforesaid agreement the wife had withdrawn the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. As the parties have to their mutual satisfaction, settled the dispute regarding items of dowry, it does not appear that there is any chance of conviction being recorded in the present case. In the changed circumstances, it will be an abuse of process of the court to permit such proceedings to go on.