IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-29582 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : November 09, 2009. Babli Singh and others ...... Petitioner(s). Versus. State of Punjab, and others. ..... Respondent(s). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Tarunveer Vashisht, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. C.S. Brar, D.A.G. Punjab, for the respondent No. 1-State. Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 7. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). The prayer in the present petition is for quashing of F.I.R. No. 106 dated 13.09.2009 under Sections 323/324/148/149 I.P.C. registered at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur, and later on Section 308 I.P.C. has been added, against the petitioners, on a complaint preferred by respondent No. 2/complainant-Dhanna Singh son of Issar Singh. Counsel for the petitioners states that during the pendency of the F.I.R.in question, a compromise has been entered into between the parties and the dispute has been amicably resolved. He contends that a compromise dated 10.10.2009 has been entered into between the parties, copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure-P-2 and, therefore, states that the matter having come to an amicable end and there is no dispute, as of now, pending between the parties, the present petition deserves to be allowed and Criminal Misc. No. M-29582 of 2009. F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed. Reply on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 7 has been filed in the Court. On the basis of the said reply, counsel for respondents No. 2 to 7 submits that a compromise dated 10.10.2009 (Annexure-P-2) having been entered into between the parties and, therefore, complainant and other injured persons, i.e., respondents No. 2 to 7, do not want to pursue the F.I.R. in question and have no objection to the quashing of the same. Dhanna Singh son of Issar Singh, Bharpur Singh son of Issar Singh, Charan Singh son of Issar Singh, Laddi Singh son of Dhan Singh, Rajpal Singh son of Bharpur Singh and Sajjan Singh son of Chattar Singh, respondents No. 2 to 7, are present in the Court and have been identified by their counsel and by H.C. Gurbachan Singh, Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur. Dhanna Singh-respondent No. 2/complainant states that a compromise has indeed been entered into between the parties and, therefore, they have no objection to the quashing of F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, as there is dispute pending between them after a compromise dated 10.10.2009, having been entered into, copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure-P-2. He further states that he does not want to press the allegations, which have been made in the F.I.R. in question against the petitioners. Respondents No. 3 to 7 also state the same. They all submit that in the light of compromise, they have no objection to the quashing of the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom and have no objection, if the present petition is allowed. -2- Criminal Misc. No. M-29582 of 2009. In view of the above, the matter having been amicably resolved between the parties and there being no dispute pending between them, it would be in the interest of justice that the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. It has also come on record that the petitioners and respondents are neighbours and there being a resolution to the dispute with the intervention of relatives, well wishers, friends and panchayat, the interest of the justice would be fully served, if the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Reliance can be made upon the Larger Bench Judgment of this Court in the case Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non-compoundable offences, has held as under :- “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 social 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 absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which -3- Criminal Misc. No. M-29582 of 2009. 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 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.” Therefore, in view of the discussion above, since the parties have amicably settled the matter, which is otherwise in the interest of justice and appears to have been effected to promote peace and harmony amongst the parties, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned F.I.R. No. 106 dated 13.09.2009 under Sections 323/324/148/149 I.P.C. registered at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur, and later on Section 308 I.P.C. has been added against the petitioners, and all other consequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE November 09, 2009. sjks. -4-