Crl. Misc. No.M-3534 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-3534 of 2011 Date of Decision: 03.02.2011 Veena Rani ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. V.K. Arya, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of case FIR No.83 dated 30.08.2010 under Sections 420, 477 of the IPC registered at Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula on the basis of compromise between the petitioner and respondent No.2. Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Amit Rana, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. At this stage, Mr. Ravinder Hooda, Advocate too appeared and accepted notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as learned counsel for the respondent state that neither of the parties is a proclaimed offender. In view of the same, there is no hesitation in taking up the case for quashing on the basis of compromise. Crl. Misc. No.M-3534 of 2011 2 The FIR was registered against the present petitioner by respondent No.2-Kuldeep Vashisht. It is contended that the present FIR is an outcome of misunderstanding during the business transaction. The petitioner and the complainant are known to each other and with the mediation of respectable persons and close friends, the matter has been compromised. The parties got their civil case referred to the Lok Adalat/Samjhauta Sadan, Panchkula and got recorded their statements before the Lok Adalat, Panchkula. As per the compromise, the respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue the above mentioned FIR against the present petitioner. An affidavit of the complainant duly executed and affirming the factum of compromise is placed on record. It is duly stated by him in the affidavit that the matter has been compromised and he has no objection, if the said FIR is quashed. The matter having been compromised, it is fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of the FIR. The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that 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 reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held 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 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- Crl. Misc. No.M-3534 of 2011 3 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.” In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised 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.” The matter has been compromised out of their free will and without any pressure. In view of the settled position of law, it would be just and proper to quash the FIR for peace, harmony and thus allow the parties to move on in life. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 83 dated 30.08.2010 under Sections 420, 477 of the IPC registered at Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula is, hereby, quashed in the interest of justice. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 03.02.2011 JUDGE gurpreet