IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-23470 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : September 03, 2009. Harsewak Lal and others. ...... Petitioners . Versus. State of Punjab, and another. ..... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. R.S. Bains, Advocate, for the petitioners . Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, A.A.G., Punjab, for the respondent No. 1-State. Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2-complainant. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). The present petition has been preferred by the petitioners, praying for quashing of F.I.R. bearing No. 12, dated 09.02.2008 under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 471, 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Dhanola, District Barnala, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of an affidavit filed by Tarlochan Singh son of Gurdial Singh, resident of Dehra Dun, District Dehra Dun, Uttara Khand, who being power of attorney of his brother, namely Kirpal Singh son of Gurdial Singh, got lodged the F.I.R. in question. In the said affidavit, it has been stated that the F.I.R. was got lodged on the basis of mis-understandings. Counsel for the petitioners contends that it was primarily a dispute over a property, which was stated to be transferred on the basis of a Will, which was alleged to be forged one. In the light of the affidavit dated Criminal Misc. No. M-23470 of 2009. 19.02.2008, which has been filed by the power of attorney of Kirpal Singh i.e. Tarlochan Singh, who is the author of the complaint, wherein he has asserted that the same was lodged on the basis of mis-understandings and the mis-understandings having been cleared up and all the disputes having been settled for the mis-understandings for which the F.I.R. was lodged, stands settled and, therefore, the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. He further contends that earlier the petitioners had approached this Court by preferring Crl. Misc. No. M- 1635 of 2009, wherein the F.I.R. was sought to be quashed on the basis of compromise. The State of Punjab filed reply, wherein it is stated that on investigation, a cancellation report was prepared and the same was submitted to the Court. The said report having not been accepted by the Court below, the petitioners have again been forced to approach this Court and, therefore, he contends that the F.I.R. in question be quashed. He further contends that the interest of justice would be served, if the proceedings are quashed in view of the fact that it was primarily a dispute qua a property on the basis of a Will and the mis-understandings having been resolved, the protraction of the trial before the Court would not be in the interest of justice. Counsel for the petitioners relies upon the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, as also the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Versus State and others 2008(4) R.C.R. (Criminal), 827. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Manoj Sharma (supra), while considering the powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has gone to the extent of stating that this Court can exercise its powers to do justice and can quash the criminal -2- Criminal Misc. No. M-23470 of 2009. proceedings, if it comes to a conclusion that ends of justice, so required e.g. there was almost no chance of conviction. He on this basis submits that the present F.I.R. in the light of amicable resolution of dispute, deserves to be quashed. Counsel for the respondent No. 2-complainant has filed an affidavit (dated 03.09.2009) of Tarlochan Singh son of Gurdial Singh, resident of Dehra Dun, District Dehra Dun, Uttara Khand, who is holder of power of attorney of Kirpal Singh and the author of the F.I.R., which was registered against the petitioners. He on the basis of the said affidavit, accepts the factum that a compromise has been entered into between the petitioners and the complainant with the intervention of respectables and the deponent/complainant has no grievance against the petitioners and does not want to pursue the case further. It has further been stated that the deponent/respondent has no objection, if the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Mr. Tarlochan Singh son of Gurdial Singh, who is present in the Court (as has been identified by his counsel), states that in the light of the position, which has been stated by him in the affidavit, he has no objection, if the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed as he does not want to pursue the matter in the light of compromise and settlement of dispute between the parties. He further submits that on the basis of mis-understandings, the F.I.R. was got registered by him, but the said cloud of uncertainty and misgivings having been cleared up with the passage of time and the position having been cleared up by the petitioners, he does not want to pursue the matter any further. -3- Criminal Misc. No. M-23470 of 2009. Counsel for the respondent No. 1-State in the light of compromise states that he does not have any objection to the quashing of F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. He further submits that, as a matter of fact, the investigating agency has already come to a conclusion that the offence was not made out against the petitioners and, therefore, has submitted cancellation report. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. In the light of Full Bench Judgment passed by this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh (supra), as also the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Manoj Sharma (supra), this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be served, if the proceedings, which have been initiated at the behest of Tarlochan Singh, power of attorney of Kirpal Singh s/o Gurdian Singh, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed as there is no chance of conviction in the present case, in the light of compromise, which has been entered into between the parties. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Versus L.N. Munnaswami, 1997 (2) S.C.C. 699, has also held that the High Court can quash the F.I.R. under Section 482 Cr.P.C., if it comes to a conclusion that the ends of justice, so required i.e. where there would be almost no chance of conviction. The present matter having been amicably resolved in the light of the fact, which has led to the registration of the F.I.R., having been cleared up, the interest of justice would require that the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. -4- Criminal Misc. No. M-23470 of 2009. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The impugned F.I.R. bearing No. 12, dated 09.02.2008 under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 471, 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Dhanola, District Barnala, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE September 03, 2009. sjks. -5-