IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-2347 of 2009 Date of decision: 20th March, 2009 Roshan Lal and others … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Arun Abrol, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General Punjab for the State. Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the complainant. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 44 dated 10.06.2008 registered at Police Station Kalanaur under Sections 308, 324, 323, 427, 148, 149, 326 IPC. Quashing of the FIR has been sought on the basis of compromise. In the present case, FIR was lodged at the instance of Satinder Singh respondent No.2. It is stated that all the accused except Jind @ Tejinder son of Pran Nath, were armed with Sotas (sticks) and iron rods, whereas Jind was armed with Datar. It is stated that accused had given injuries to Satinder and Pardeep Kumar. On 13th June, 2008, DDR No. 12 was recorded and it was found that offence under Section 326 IPC is also made out. Criminal Misc. No. M-2347 of 2009 During the pendency of the petition, it is stated that parties have arrived at compromise. Compromise deed is annexed as Annexure P-3. Affidavits of Pardeep Kumar and Satinder Singh, in support of the compromise have also been placed on record as Annexure P-4 and P-5 respectively. Satinder Singh son of Sham Lal and Pardeep Kumar son of Jagir Lal are present in Court. They have been identified by Head Constable Sarabjit Singh of Police Station Kalanaur, who is also present in Court to assist Counsel for the State, Mr.Mehardeep Singh Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Satinder Singh and Pardeep Kumar have also been identified by their counsel Mr.Parminder Singh. Both Satinder Singh and Pardeep Kumar have stated that accused and the injured complainant are residents of the same locality and due to intervention of respectables, compromise has been arrived at between the parties and it has been agreed that Satinder Singh complainant injured and Pardeep Kumar injured shall facilitate quashing of the FIR. They have stated that they have no objection in case present FIR is quashed. It has been held by a Full Bench of this Court in ‘Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another’, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that where a compromise has been arrived at between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by pursuing the criminal litigation. Taking into consideration the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh’s case (supra), present petition is allowed and the FIR, along with all subsequent proceedings, is quashed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 20, 2009 rps 2