233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.11263 of 2015 Date of Decision: 14.08.2015 [ENTITY] and another Petitioners Vs. [ENTITY] and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. [ENTITY], Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1/State. [ENTITY], J. (Oral)
Present petition under [SECTION] [ACT] is for quashing of FIR No.32 dated 05.05.2012, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [ACT], registered with Police Station Mullanpur Garibdass, District SAS Nagar (Annexure P-1) and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromise dated 19.09.2014 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.
As per allegations in the FIR, on 04.05.2012, when grandmother-[ENTITY] of the complainant-[ENTITY] was lying on the cot in the courtyard and complainant cleaning utensils there, various horns and sharp lights were coming in front of their gate and thereafter their gate opened forcibly by the petitioners/accused-[ENTITY], [ENTITY] and co-accused [ENTITY] and three other unknown persons. They came in front of the complainant and raising lalkaras loudly and said that where is [ENTITY] (her uncle) and inflicted several injuries on the complainant and his grandmother. The cause of enmity is that complainant's uncle has enmity of having good business of Property Dealer.
Vide order dated 16.07.2015, this Court directed the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to send report with regard to compromise in pursuance of which, a report/letter No. 497 dated 06.08.2015 has been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kharar, which is taken on record as Mark-A. It is stated in the report that the complainant has arrived at a compromise with the accused- petitioners.
Learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI [ENTITY], states that challan has not been presented. She further states that she is unable to raise any serious objection to the quashing of the FIR on the basis of the compromise since the complainant is not willing to support the prosecution case.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT] has made it explicitly clear in para 15 of its judgment that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and [SECTION] of the Code does not limit or effect the powers under [SECTION] of the Code.
A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. [ENTITY] and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under [SECTION] [ACT], may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non compoundable offences. The relevant extracts read as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the [ACT], which can affect the inherent power of this Court under [SECTION]. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under [SECTION] of the [ACT], in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. "
Hon'ble Apex Court in another case in [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT] while relying upon its decision in [ENTITY]'s case (supra) has also held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of criminal proceedings and the continuance of the same after compromise between the parties would be a futile exercise.
Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. [ENTITY], 2008(4) SCC 582, the relevant extract of which is as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law. "
Keeping in view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under [SECTION] [ACT], for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.32 dated 05.05.2012, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [ACT], registered with Police Station Mullanpur Garibdass, District SAS Nagar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.
August 14, 2015 ([ENTITY]) [ENTITY] JUDGE