Bhajan Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr
- Court
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & con
nnected cases 1
IN T
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ
JAB & HARYANA AT
RH
CHANDIGAR
1 C
Date of
f Decision: 03.09.2026
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&
&M)
Bhajan Sin
State of Pu
2. CRM
Maan Sing
State of Pu
3. CRM
Bhajan Sin
Balwinder
4.
CRM
Maan Sing
Balwinder
CORAM:
Present :
ngh and others
…..Petitioners
versus
unjab and another
…..Respondents
M)
M M No. 22432 of 2025 (O&M
gh
…..Petitioner
versus
unjab and another
…..Respondents
M M No. 26002 of 2019 (O&M
M)
ngh and others
…..Petitioners
versus
Kaur
…..Respondent
M M No. 22522 of 2017 (O&M
M)
gh
…..Petitioner
versus
Kaur
..Respondent
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE
E RAMESH KUMARI.
Mr. Vivek K.Thakur, Advocat
all the petitions.
Mr. Yadwinder Singh, A
Punjab.
None for the private responde
te, for the petitioners in
Assistant Advocate General,
ents.
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 2
RAMESH KUMARI, J.
All the four petitions are taken up together as the common
questions of law and facts are involved therein.
CRM M Nos. 39696 of 2017 & 22432 of 2025 (O&M)
1. Both the present petitions have been filed by the petitioners under
Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) for
quashing of a criminal case arising out of First Information Report and
all the consequent subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. The
details of the First Information Report are as under:-
FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station
111 07.12.2016 342, 323, 120-B and 109 Bholath, District
IPC Kapurthala
CRM M Nos. 26002 of 2019 & 22522 of 2025
2. Both the present petitions have been filed by the petitioners under
Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) for
quashing of criminal complaint bearing No. COMA 525 dated
06.02.2018 titled as “Balwinder Kaur vs. Maan Singh and others’) filed
under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005 (Annexure P-7) pending before the Court of Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bholath as well as the summoning order dated
06.02.2018 (Annexure P-8) and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom.
3. The above noted criminal case bearing FIR No. 111 dated 07.12.2016
under Sections 323, 342, 120-B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code had
been got registered at Police Station Bholath, District Kapurthala, vide
Annexure P-1 by respondent No.2 alleging that her marriage had been
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 3
solemnized about 17 years back (before registration of FIR) with Mann
Singh. She was having one son and one daughter, aged 15 years and 13
years respectively. She also alleged that her husband prior to their
marriage was living abroad in Lebanon and in the year 2006, he had
gone to Portugal and continued visiting her from Portugal and whenever
he came to India, he gave beatings to her and his behaviour towards her
always remained cruel. She used to tell her father-in-law Bhajan Singh
and mother-in-law Ranjit Singh regarding his behaviour and instead of
supporting her, her parents in law in connivance with her husband used
to taunt her regarding her character and they also used to instigate her
husband. She further alleged that about 5/6 months back, her husband
went to England and on 27.10.2016 in the morning at 06.30 A.M. he
came to the house and after keeping luggage, went to the house of her
in-laws and in the evening at 07.00 p.m., came back to the house in
drunk condition and started giving beatings to her by saying to tell him
with whom she was having relations and when her daughter and son
tried to get her released, her husband also gave injuries to her daughter
and by putting the head scarf (Dupatta) in her neck, he pressed her neck
and tried to kill her and after putting the scarf in her mouth, he locked
her along with her children in the room. Thereafter she gave a call to her
parents over phone, who came there and took them out from the room
and got her admitted for treatment in the Civil Hospital, Bholath, where
she remained admitted for six days. She further alleged that keeping in
view the future of her children, her parents and respectable persons, got
a compromise effected but after living peacefully for a few days, her
husband in connivance and by hatching a conspiracy along with her
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 4
mother-in-law Ranjit Kaur, father-in-law Bhajan Singh, sisters-in-law
Rimpy and Babli started harassing her extensively and her sisters-in-law
started saying that she would not be allowed to live in the house. She
further alleged that on the night of 20.11.2016, her husband, after
consuming liquor, started breaking the utensils and glasses and also
started giving beatings to her and her children and locked all of them in
a room and her mother-in-law and father-in-law instigated him. In the
meantime, out of the glass scattered in the courtyard, foot of her
mother-in-law was injured and by falling, she had suffered other injuries
also. At that time, she alongwith her children was locked in the room
and then she made a call to her brother Lakhwinder Singh and father
Jasvir Singh and also made a call at 181 Helpline, and thereafter they
were taken out of the room. She further alleged that seeing the future of
her children, she and her parents continued to enter into a compromise
at the Panchayati level, but on the contrary, her husband alongwith his
family members continued to threaten to kill them and they also advised
her to leave the house along with the children as she would not be
rehabilitated in the house and would be killed. She prayed for taking
action against the accused persons and for providing security to her as
well as to her children. She also alleged that on 27.10.2016 and
20.11.2016, in front of the people, his husband had torn her clothes and
insulted her.
4. After registration of the case against her husband Maan Singh, parents
in law-Bhajan Singh and Ranjit Kaur and sisters in law Rimpy and
Babli, the investigation was conducted.
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 5
5. The wife, namely, Balwinder Kaur also filed a criminal complaint being
COMA No. 525 dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure P-7) under Section 12 of
the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short
‘the Act of 2005’) before the trial Court against her husband, Maan
Singh, parents in law and sisters in law levelling the same allegations
which are the basis of FIR in question. In the complaint COMA No.
525, the complainant prayed for grant of protection order under Section
17 of the Act of 2005.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner-Maan
Singh and respondent No.2-Balwinder Kaur had entered into a
compromise on 28.12.2016 (annexed with CRM-M No. 39696 of 2017
as Annexure P-2) which is signed by respondent No.2 as well as
petitioner Maan Singh. In terms of the compromise (Annexure P-2),
both the petitioner Maan Singh and respondent No.2-Balwinder Kaur
filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for
dissolution of their marriage by way of mutual divorce. Their marriage
has since been dissolved on 17.07.2017. Statement of the petitioner and
respondent No.2 on the first motion were recorded vide Annexure P-3
on 12.01.2017 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Kapurthala. In her statement, respondent No.2 had specifically stated
that she will not pursue the FIR as well as the complaint. Respondent
No.2 also suffered a statement Annexure P-4 before the police that she
had got the FIR registered against her relatives and with the intervention
of the respectable persons a compromise was effected and therefore,
FIR be quashed. However, after dissolution of marriage and receipt of
Rs.7,50,000/-, respondent No.2 is not coming forward for getting the
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 6
FIR quashed whereas petitioner Maan Singh had deposited
Rs.2,50,000/- each in the name of his son and daughter separately vide
Annexure P-5 by opening their accounts in Punjab Gramin Bank.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that at the initial
stage, Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Advocate had appeared on behalf of the
respondent-wife but thereafter he failed to appear in Court whereas
continuation of criminal proceedings arising out of the FIR and the
complaint cases are nothing but an abuse of the process of law and
causing unnecessary harassment to the petitioner-Maan Singh, his
parents Bhajan Singh and Ranjit Kaur, sisters, namely, Rimpy and
Babli.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly prayed for quashing of
the above noted criminal cases as well as the COMA 525 dated
06.02.2018 titled as “Balwinder Kaur vs. Maan Singh and others’) filed
under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005 (Annexure P-7) pending before the Court of Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bholath as well as the summoning order dated
06.02.2018 (Annexure P-8) and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom.
9. With the able assistance of learned counsel for the petitioners and State
counsel, this Court has gone through the documents placed on record.
10. FIR No. 111 dated 07.12.2016 was got registered against the petitioner
Maan Singh, his parents Bhajan Singh and Ranjit Kaur and sisters,
Rimpy and Babli vide Annexure P-1. However, thereafter respondent
No.2-wife had entered into a compromise dated 28.12.2016 (annexed
with CRM-M No. 39696 of 2017 as Annexure P-2) whereby petitioner
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 7
Maan Singh agreed to deposit a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- in the accounts of
mediators to be given to Balwinder Kaur-wife and her children and the
amount was to be given by the mediators to Balwinder Kaur after grant
of decree of divorce. However, the petitioner had deposited Rs.
2,50,000/- each in the accounts of his children on 14.07.2017. In the
first motion statement, respondent No.2 had specifically stated to the
following effect:-
“My marriage was solemnized on 10.01.2001
according to Sikh Rites and ceremonies at Village Raipur
Peerbuxwala, Tehsil Bholath, Kapurthala. From this
wedlock, two children namely Amandeep Singh was born
on 25.01.2002, Simrandeep Kaur was born on 18.10.2003,
who are presently residing with me under my care and
custody and their custody shall remain with me. From the
very beginning of the marriage, our relations remained
strained. We have not been able to cope with each other
due to the temperamental differences. Now, we are
residing separate from each other since 22.12.2015. Now
with the intervention of the relatives and respectables, we
have decided to get our marriage dissolved.
The dispute with regard to the dowry articles,
marriage expenses and permanent maintenance (present,
past and future etc.) has been settled between us.
Petitioner no.1 will pay Rs.8,50,000/- to petitioner No. 2 for
upbringing of children and their education. Petitioner No.2
has already received Rs.1,00,000/-. Remaining amount of.
Rs.7,50,000/- will be paid to petitioner No. 2, at the time of
motion of second statement, in the shape of FDR of Rs.
2,50,000/- each on the name of above said children and
remaining amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to petitioner No.2.
Petitioner N.2 has lodged an FIR no.111 dated 7.12.2016
PS Bholath and the matter of same has already been
settled between the parties and the petitioner No.2 does
not want to pursue the above said FIR. Petitioner no.1 has
also filed a criminal complaint the against the petitioner
No.2 and the petitioner No.1 does not want to pursue the
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 8
above said complaint. It is also settled between the parties
that the house situated in village Kamrai, which is in the
name of petitioner No.2 has been exchanged by her with
the house of the father of petitioner no.1 situated at village
Mubarkpur, and the petitioner No.2 will be the owner of
house situated at village Mubarkpur and the father of the
petitioner No.1 will be owner of house situated at village
Kamrai, District Kapurthala. Petitioner No.2 will not claim
anything from petitioner No.1 in future towards
maintenance allowance, alimony, Istridhan articles and
marriage expenses. All the claims of the petitioner No. 2
against petitioner No. 1 have been satisfied. We shall not
file any case of any kind against each other after this
settlement and divorce.”
11. Thus, Rs. 1,00,000/- had already been received when her statement on
the first motion was recorded on 12.01.2017 and thereafter
Rs.2,50,000/- each had been deposited by the petitioner in the accounts
of his two children. Respondent No.2 had also suffered a statement
(Annexure P-4) before the Investigating Officer Jaswant Singh that she
has got effected the compromise and the case filed by her be cancelled.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said statement
(Annexure P-4) was suffered by the respondent No.2 because she had
already received the remaining amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the
petitioner Maan Singh. As respondent No.2 had settled her claimed with
the petitioner and their marriage has since been dissolved on
17.07.2017, continuation of criminal proceedings and the criminal
complaints against the petitioner, who are former husband, parents in
law and sisters-in-law of the respondent No.2, are nothing but an abuse
of the process of law causing unnecessary harassment to the petitioner
Maan Singh and his family members which requires exercise of extra
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 9
ordinary powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS-2023 for
quashment of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner Maan
Singh and his parents and sisters.
13. The law on the point is well settled that a criminal case can be quashed
if it serves the ends of justice. The offence even is non-compoundable
can also be quashed.
14. It is a settled position of law that the power of High Court to quash the
criminal proceedings or FIR or a complaint in exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction is of wide plenitude with no statutory limit can be imposed
therein. ( Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR
(Criminal) 1052); Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012
and
(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 Narinder Singh and others vs. State of
Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466).
15. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court finds that
continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would be an
abuse of the process of the Court and travesty of justice in the facts and
circumstances of the present case which squarely falls within the ambit
and parameters settled by judicial precedents and that allowing and
accepting the prayer of the petitioners for quashing of the FIR in
question as well as the criminal complaints filed by respondent No.2
against the petitioners and his family members would be securing the
ends of justice, which is primarily the object of legislature enacted
under Section 528 of BNSS-2023.
16. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 111 dated
07.12.2016 under Sections 342, 323, 120-B and 109 of the Indian Penal
Code registered at Police Station, Bholath, Distlrict Kapurthala and all
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM M No. 39696 of 2017 (O&M) & connected cases 10
the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed
qua the petitioners. Simultaneously, the criminal complaint bearing No.
COMA 525 dated 06.02.2018 titled as “Balwinder Kaur vs. Maan Singh
and others’ filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Annexure P-7) pending before the Court
of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bholath as well as the
summoning order dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure P-8) and all the
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are also quashed.
17. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
18. A copy of this order be placed in the connected files.
(
RAMESH KUMARI)
03.09.2026 JUDGE
ravinder
Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No
Whether reportable √Yes/No
RAVINDER KUMAR
2026.09.10 11:36
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document