Crl. Misc. No.M-33166 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-33166 of 2010 Date of Decision: 16.11.2010 Mayank Gulati and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.S. Paul, D.A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. Shivoy Dhir, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** 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 the FIR No.54 dated 03.10.2009 under Sections 406/498-A IPC registered at Police Station Fatehgarh Churian and all consequential proceedings arising thereof on the basis of compromise entered into before the Lok Adalat. The FIR was registered against the present petitioners by respondent No.2-Akshi Bhatia. Thereafter, the matter has been compromised i.e the parties have entered into a compromise before the Permanent Lok Adalat. As per the compromise, the complainant respondent No.2-Akshi Bhatia does not wish to pursue the above mentioned FIR against the petitioners. An Crl. Misc. No.M-33166 of 2010 2 affidavit was also executed affirming the factum of compromise. Statements of Akshi and Mayank Gulati have also been recorded by the Lok Adalat and the copies of the same are placed on record as P-4 and P- 5. It is duly stated by respondent No.2/complainant that the matter has been compromised and she has no objection, if the said FIR is quashed. Reply has also been filed by respondent No.2 stating therein that the matter has been compromised and she has no objection, if the FIR is quashed. 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- 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 Crl. Misc. No.M-33166 of 2010 3 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.” In the present case, the dispute arises out of the matrimonial dispute. The same has been compromised before the Permanent Lok Adalat. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.54 dated 03.10.2009 under Sections 406/498-A IPC registered at Police Station Fatehgarh Churian and all consequential proceedings arising thereof on the basis of compromise are hereby quashed in the interest of justice. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 16.11.2010 JUDGE gurpreet