CRM No. M 6669 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 6669 of 2011 Date of decision: 05.04.2011 Anil Kumar ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana for the respondent - State Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter 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 FIR No. 479 dated 20.08.2010 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Central Faridabad, District Faridabad which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 26.10.2010 arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. Learned State counsel has filed reply in Court today. The same is taken on record. In para 4 of the said reply, it is mentioned that the matter has been compromised between the parties on 13.10.2010 and as per the CRM No. M 6669 of 2011 2 compromise, the complainant has received a sum of Rs.1,00,000 through cheque No. 820560 dated 06.10.2010 drawn on Indian Overseas Bank Gurgaon and Rs.75,000/- in cash from accused Anil Kumar Mehta. It is also stated in the reply that the factum of compromise was duly verified by the Investigating officer on the direction of Court of Shri Deepak Gupta learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad while adjudicating the bail application vide order dated 04.12.2010. No reply has been filed on behalf of the complainant. Accordingly, the facts have not been disputed. From the above, it is evident that the matter has been compromised between the parties and as such, this Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR on the basis of compromise. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “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 reduced 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 exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to CRM No. M 6669 of 2011 3 prescribe the exercise of such power.” The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize 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.” Taking into account the allegations, compromise dated 26.10.2010 as well as reply filed by the State, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 479 dated 20.08.2010 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Central Faridabad, District Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 05.04.2011 mohan