Can a Complainant Back Out After Reaping the Benefits of a Divorce Settlement? Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Cheating FIR Despite Refusal to Verify Compromise; Calls It Abuse of Process
Case Name: Meenu Sharma & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Date of Judgment: 23 July 2026
Citation: CRM-M-54235-2021
Bench: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that a complainant who has voluntarily acted upon a matrimonial settlement and derived substantial benefits therefrom cannot subsequently frustrate the compromise by refusing to participate in its verification and simultaneously insist upon continuation of criminal proceedings. Once the settlement has been substantially implemented, continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law, warranting the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to secure the ends of justice.
Summary: The petition sought quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code arising out of matrimonial disputes between the parties. The complainant alleged that his wife and her family had concealed material facts before marriage, deceived him, misappropriated jewellery, and that one of the accused had borrowed ₹1 lakh without repayment.
During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, however, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and dissolved their marriage by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. In furtherance of the settlement, the wife withdrew the maintenance proceedings instituted under Section 125 Cr.P.C., while the parties acted upon all other material terms of the compromise. Although the High Court repeatedly directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate for verification of the compromise, the complainant failed to appear despite being granted multiple opportunities, thereby preventing formal verification of the settlement.
Examining the conduct of the complainant, the Court observed that he had already accepted and enjoyed the benefits flowing from the compromise, including the decree of divorce by mutual consent and withdrawal of proceedings initiated against him, yet sought to keep the criminal prosecution alive by deliberately avoiding verification of the compromise.
The Court held that such conduct was neither fair nor equitable and amounted to an attempt to misuse the criminal process for continued harassment. Relying upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ruchi Agarwal v. Amit Kumar Agrawal and Mohd. Shamim v. Nahid Begum, along with consistent precedents of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, the Court reiterated that a party cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate by accepting the benefits of a settlement while simultaneously resiling from it to continue criminal proceedings. Since the compromise had already been substantially implemented and the complainant’s refusal to support it was found to be mala fide, the Court concluded that continuation of the criminal case would serve no legitimate purpose and would constitute an abuse of the process of law.
Decision: Allowing the petition, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction and quashed the FIR registered under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station City Kotkapura, District Faridkot, together with the final report and all consequential proceedings, holding that intervention was necessary to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of the Court.