[CASE NUMBER] (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] (O&M) Date of decision : 04.09.2012 [ENTITY] and others Petitioners Versus [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. [ENTITY], Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for respondent No. 2. [ENTITY], J. (Oral)
The epitome of facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition and oozing out from the record, is that, in the wake of complaint of complainant [ENTITY] son of [ENTITY]-respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against the petitioners-accused, vide FIR No.60 dated 02.08.2011 (Annexure P-1), for the commission of offences punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT], by the police of Police Station Kathnangal, District Amritsar.
2. During the course of investigation of the case, good sense prevailed and the parties have amicably settled their disputes, by means of compromise dated 15.12.2011 (Annexure P-2) and affidavit (Annexure P-3).
3. Having compromised the matter, now the petitioners-accused have preferred the instant petition, to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2), invoking the provisions of [SECTION] [ACT], inter-alia, pleading as under: -
"That both the parties are residing in the same village and they use to meet with other in the village common functions. Now with the intervention of respectable, Panchayat and residents of the village, grievances of both the parties are redressed and there is no grudge left between the parties and all kind of enmity is pacified. It is further agreed that respondent No.2 will has no objection in case the present FIR is quashed and they do not want to continue a conflict with each other and ready to bury all the differences.
That on account of above settlement, both the parties have executed a compromise deed and further the respondent No.2 has given a affidavit to the effect that he has entered into compromise with the petitioner and has agreed that he would not pursue the above said FIR and has no objection in case the FIR is quashed by this Hon'ble Court. The compromise deed and affidavit of respondent No.2 dated 15.12.2011 are being appended as Annexure P-2 & P-3.
That since the petitioners and the respondent No.2 do not want that there should be any enmity between the parties and have decided to bury all their differences, the respectable of the area got together and a compromise was entered, so that the peace may be maintained."
On the strength of aforesaid grounds, the petitioners sought to quash the FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in the manner depicted hereinabove. Not only that the complainant filed the reply, in which the factum of compromise (Annexure P-2) and affidavit (Annexure P-3) was admitted. He has no objection if the FIR (Annexure P-1) registered against the petitioners accused is quashed.
4. Meaning thereby, it stands proved on record that the parties have amicably settled their disputes, by way of compromise (Annexure P-2) and affidavit (Annexure P-3).
5. Above being the position on record, now the short and significant question, though important, that arises for determination in the instant case is, as to whether the present criminal prosecution against the petitioners deserve to be quashed in view of the compromise or not ?
6. Having regard to the contentions of learned counsel for parties, to my mind, it would be in the interest and justice would be sub-served, if the parties are allowed to compromise the matter. Moreover, learned counsel are ad idem that in view of the settlement of disputes between the parties, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this respect.
7. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that, the law with regard to quashing such criminal prosecution on the basis of settlement between the parties, by virtue of compromise, has now been well-settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases [PRECEDENT]; [PRECEDENT]; [PRECEDENT] and Full Bench of this Court in case Kulwinder Singh and others v. [ENTITY] and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, wherein it was ruled that the High Court has vast inherent power to quash the criminal prosecution on the basis of settlement of disputes between the parties.
8. The crux of the law laid down in the indicated judgments is that the power under [SECTION] [ACT] has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society and resolution of a dispute by means of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same, unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery, if the statement is fair being free from under pressure. Meaning thereby, the High Court has unlimited power to quash the criminal proceedings, relatable to such cases, on the basis of lawful settlement. The law laid down in the aforesaid judgments "mutatis mutandis" is applicable in the instant case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
9. As is evident from the record that the parties have amicably settled their disputes with the intervention of respectables of the village of both the parties. They belong to the same village. They want to live in peace. They have redressed all their respective grievances. The complainant [ENTITY] has no objection if the FIR (Annexure P-1) registered against the petitioners-accused is quashed. Thus, it would be seen that since, the compromise is in the welfare and interest of the parties, so, there is no impediment in translating their wishes into reality and to quash the criminal prosecution to set the matter at rest, to enable them to live in peace and to enjoy the life and liberty in a dignified manner. Therefore, to me, the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, deserve to be quashed in this context.
10. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the present petition is hereby accepted. Consequently, the impugned FIR No.60 dated 02.08.2011 (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed and the petitioners-accused are accordingly discharged from the indicated offences, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
September 04, 2012 ([ENTITY]) naresh.k Judge