Crl. Misc.No.M 29933 of 2010 # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAT AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M 29933 of 2010 Date of Decision:-28.10.2010 Rajandeep Kaur @ Rajni etc. ......Petitioners. Versus State of Punjab etc. ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. R.S. Modi, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Harsh Nain, Advocate for Respondents No.2. *** JASWANT SINGH, J. Present petition under section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of FIR No.150 dated 28.6.2010 under sections 363, 366-A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station Patran, District Patiala and the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same on the basis of compromise dated 4.10.2010(Annexure P-2). As per the allegations in the FIR, Komal Sharma-minor daughter of the complainant had accompanied/enticed by her friend Crl. Misc.No.M 29933 of 2010 # 2# Rajandeep Kaur @ Rajni(petitioner no.1) and brother of Rajni, namely Sajjan Singh-petitioner no.2 resulting into lodging of the FIR. Complainant Jatinder Pal Sharma as well as his daughter Komal Sharma are present in the court today and have been identified by their counsel Mr. Harsh Nain, Advocate. Both of them have stated that they have no objection if in terms of the compromise(Annexure P- 2) the aforesaid FIR and all the subsequent proceedings thereto are quashed. Statements of both complainant as well as his daughter Komal Sharma have been recorded separately. Complainant in his statement has stated that his daughter Komal Sharma had gone of her own sweet will and she was not taken away by anyone. Komal Sharma also corroborated the statement of his father i.e. respondent no.2- complainant in her statement. Learned State Counsel is unable to raise any serious objection in view of the aforesaid compromise and statements of the complainant and his daughter Komal Sharma wherein they have deposed on the basis of the compromise A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 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 Cr.P.C., which can affect the inherent Crl. Misc.No.M 29933 of 2010 # 3# power of this Court under Section 482. 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 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.” Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. State of Punjab 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 legal impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.150 dated 28.6.2010 under sections 363, 366-A, 34 of the Indian Penal Crl. Misc.No.M 29933 of 2010 # 4# Code, registered with Police Station Patran, District Patiala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed against all the three petitioners. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 28th October, 2010 Vinay.