IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M NO. 1957 of 2009 Date of decision:30.03.2009 Jaswinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents CRM-M NO. 7033 of 2008 Aas Kaur and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. M.S.Dhami, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Abhishekh Chautala, DAG, Punjab for respondent no. 1. Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for respondent no.2. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. This order shall dispose of CRM-M NO. 1957 of 2009 titled as “Jaswinder Singh versus State of Punjab and another” and CRM-M NO. 7033 of 2008 titled as “Aas Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and another” as they arise from the same FIR. Prayer in these petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing of FIR No. 185, dated 23.08.2006, registered under Sections 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise. CRM-M NO. 1957 of 2009 and CRM-M NO. 7033 of 2008 [2] Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for respondent no. 2 pray that as the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have resolved their disputes, the aforementioned FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. It is further submitted that the complainant, Mandeep Kaur and her husband Jaswinder Singh have been granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent and therefore, the complainant does not wish to proceed with the FIR or the trial. The complainant, Mandeep Kaur, who is present in Court and has been duly identified by her counsel. She states that she has no objection, if the FIR is quashed. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as the parties have entered into a compromise, the State does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. I have heard counsel for the parties and are of the considered opinion that parties have resolved their matrimonial differences by way of a bonafide settlement without any fraud, coercion or undue influence. The complainant, Mandeep Kaur, has filed an affidavit acknowledging the settlement, the receipt of a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- and has also deposed therein, that she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR. A compromise or a settlement serves the immediate purpose of parties, as it enables them to proceed with their lives without ill will or rancour and in peace and harmony. In view of the compromise, the prosecution witnesses are not likely to support the prosecution and to continue with the trial would be a wastage of public money and valuable Court time. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a similar controversy, in B.S.Joshi and CRM-M NO. 1957 of 2009 and CRM-M NO. 7033 of 2008 [3] others V. State of Haryana and another, 2003(2) RCR(Criminal) 888, has held that in cases arising from a matrimonial disputes, where parties have settled their dispute, by a bonafide settlement, the High Court in the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would be justified in quashing proceedings emanating from matrimonial disputes, even where the offences complained of are non-compoundable. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, as the prayer for quashing of the FIR, all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom does not suffer from any legal impediment, present petitions are allowed and the FIR No. 185, dated 23.08.2006, registered under Sections 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. [RAJIVE BHALLA] JUDGE 30th March, 2009 SKaushik