CRM No. M 15863 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 15863 of 2010 Date of decision: 26.05.2010 Jagtar Singh alias Tari and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Ms Sushma Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Ms Shweta Bawa, Advocate for respondent-complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 139 dated 08.07.2009 under Section 323, 324, 307, 341, 148, 149 (Section 307 IPC was deleted and Section 326 IPC was added subsequently) of the Indian Penal Code Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners, on the basis of the compromise dated 08.07.2009 having been arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record CRM No. M 15863 of 2010 2 as Annexure P-2. A separate statement of the complainant to the same effect has also been got recorded in the Court. Complainant- Shavinder Singh son of Gurbax Singh has also filed his affidavit which is annexed with the petition as Anenxure P5. In his affidavit, the complainant stated that he has no grudge against Sukhwinder and Kulwinder Singh and do not want to pros3ecute them in the aforesaid FIR. Similar, vide affidavit (Annexure P- 4) Shaminder Singh alias Sabi, stated that due to some misunderstanding, he got involved Jagtar Singh and Jaspal Singh in the FIR whereas they are innocent. He further stated that their names be removed from the said FIR. Facts of the case are that on 07.07.2009, a fight took place between Shavinder Singh alias Sabi son of Gurbax Singh and Kulwinder Singh, Sukhwinder Singh. In that regard, Shavinder Singh got registered the present FIR against Kulwinder Singh, Sukhwinder Singh sons of Major Singh. Now with the intervention of the Panchayat and respectable persons of the village, the matter has been compromised between the parties. Both the parties will be bound by the terms and conditions as imposed in the compromise. It is pertinent to mention here that on the representation dated 20.07.2009 filed by petitioner No. 1 an enquiry was conducted by DSP Shahkot vide which the evidence of the Sarpanch and other witnesses were collected and on the basis of the evidence adduced before the DSP Shahkot, Section 307 IPC was struck down and Section 326 IPC was added and Bachan Singh father of petitioner No. 1 and 2 was also exonerated in that enquiry as an accused. It is further submitted that even the Dara Mand who was shown to have come in Tata Safari along with Pistol has also been CRM No. M 15863 of 2010 3 exonerated by the DSP Shahkot. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.” The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize 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.” CRM No. M 15863 of 2010 4 Compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. Taking into account the allegations, affidavit as well as the statement of the complainant and the matter being totally personal in nature, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the aforesaid FIR and further proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 26.05.2010