Crl. Misc. No. M- 5547 of 2009 {1} In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 5547 of 2009 Date of Decision:April 29, 2009 Chander Ali and another ---Petitioners versus State of Haryana and another ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr.R.M.Ravi,Advocate, for the petitioners Ms. Maloo Chahal, DAG, Haryana Mr.Sanjiv Sheoran, Advocate, for respondent. *** SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.')for quashing of FIR No. 206 dated 16.9.2004 under Sections 323, 325, 452,363, 511 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Chhappar District Yamuna Nagar on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners No.1 was married to respondent No. 2. Some differences arose between them. Due to that reason, FIR was got lodged. Now with the Crl. Misc. No. M- 5547 of 2009 {2} intervention of relatives and friends parties have entered into a compromise dated 24.1.2009(Annexure P-2). Petitioners No. 1 and respondent No. 2 have divorced each other. Respondent No. 2 is present in person along with her counsel and has admitted the contents of the compromise(Annexure P-2) wherein it has been stated that she do not want to take any action against the petitioners with regard to the FIR in question and has no objection if the same is quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in paras 23 and 24 has held as under:- “23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute Crl. Misc. No. M- 5547 of 2009 {3} involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised? 24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S.Joshi's case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.” Since the parties have arrived at a compromise, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, in question. Accordingly this petition is allowed. FIR No. 206 dated 16.9.2004 under Sections 323, 325, 452,363, 511 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Chhappar District Yamuna Nagar and all consequential proceeding arising therefrom are quashed. (SABINA) JUDGE April 29, 2009 PARAMJIT