Crl. Misc. No. M-38376 of 2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-38376 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision : 11.5.2011 Balwinder Singh ......Petitioner versus State of Haryana and Another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. S.N.Yadav Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana. **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.191 dated 16.9.2000 under Sections 326/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Bhuna, District Fatehabad and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3), entered between the parties. During the trial, the petitioner has been convicted vide judgment dated 16.10.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad Annexure P-2 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- under Section 326 of IPC. Aggrieved against this order, the petitioner filed an appeal, which is pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad. However, during the pendency of the appeal, the parties have entered into compromise Annexure P-3. As per compromise, the complainant has no objection if the Court acquits the petitioner. Crl. Misc. No. M-38376 of 2010(O&M) 2 Complainant has also filed his affidavit stating that he has no grudge against the accused and the compromise is without any pressure. Since the offence under Sections 326/34 of IPC were non- compoundable, they have approached this Court seeking permission to compound the offence. In compliance of order dated 03.01.2011, the parties were directed to get their statements recorded before the trial court, who will send his report with regard to the validity of compromise between the parties. Report of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Fatehabad has been received. As per this report, on 04.03.2011 statements of the parties were recorded in which they have stated that they have entered into compromise and decided to end the matter and live in peace and harmony. Statements of Diwan Singh-complainant and one of the injured have also been recorded. Both the parties have admitted the factum of compromise. So compromise appears to be voluntarily and fair. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the trial is likely to result into acquittal and continuous proceedings against the petitioner will be wastage of time. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Puttaswamy Vs. State of Karnataka & Another 2009(1) RCR(Criminal) 501 wherein after conviction the parties had entered into compromise and granted permission to compound the offence. In view of the settled proposition of law and in view of the fact that the parties have compromised the matter, there is no impediment to grant permission to the parties to compound the offence. Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed to compound the offence under Sections 326/34 IPC. As such, the present petition is partly allowed and the petitioner is directed Crl. Misc. No. M-38376 of 2010(O&M) 3 to appear before the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad where the appeal is pending, who shall pass an appropriate order in the light of permission having granted by this Court to the parties to compound the offence. The Criminal Miscellaneous petition is partly allowed. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE May 11, 2011 Savita