IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc.16001-M of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 22, 2008 GAGANDEEP MADAN & ORS. ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr.SS Majithia, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. KS Sidhu, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Jatinder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks quashing of FIR No.310 dated 14.11.2007 under Sections 363-A, 366, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sadar Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) on the basis of compromise. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners and respondent No.2 are residents of the same locality. There was some misunderstanding, on account of which the FIR came to be lodged. Damini is the person in whose context the FIR was lodged. Respondent No.2-Seema Sharma, mother of Damini, is a divorcee and does not want to prolong the dispute with the petitioners. With the intervention of respectables of the locality, the dispute has been settled. Criminal Misc.16001-M of 2007 2 Respondent-Seema Sharma as also Damini, are present in Court, as identified by Shri Jatinder Singh, Advocate. Seema Sharma (respondent No.2-complainant) and Damini have endorsed the factum of compromise and state that they are not interested in prosecuting the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the compromise. This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench). The following has been held in paras 28 to 30:- “28. 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 so- cial amity and reduces 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 by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the ab- sence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventuali- ties which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation. 29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C which can af- fect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Fur- ther, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone Criminal Misc.16001-M of 2007 3 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. 30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be exer- cised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and cir- cumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra ordinary effective instrument to main- tain and control social order. The Courts play role of para- mount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-last- ing congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.” Having regard to the fact that life of a young girl is involved and not only the victim but also her mother-complainant have endorsed the factum of compromise (Annexure P-2), this petition is allowed. FIR No.310 dated 14.11.2007 under Sections 363-A, 366, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sadar Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) is quashed. August 22, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE