Crl.Misc.No.M-2792 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-2792 of 2009 Date of Decision: 10 - 3 - 2009 Harbans Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.S.S.Goraya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Mehardeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr.Sanjay Gupta,Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Mr.Sanjay Gupta has filed reply on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3. Same is taken on record. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Seeking quashing of case FIR No.127 dated 2.9.2005 registered at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur under Sections 420, 465, 467 and 471 IPC. In the present case, FIR was lodged at the instance of Gurdev Sigh and Balkar Singh respondents No.2 and 3. They had stated that they had entered into an agreement to sell for sale of 18 Kanals of land and Harbans Singh for execution of sale deed had received Rs.6,33,000/- as earnest money. Later another sum of Rs.57,000/- was given. Thus, in all Crl.Misc.No.M-2792 of 2009 [2] Rs.6,90,000/- was given to Harbans Singh as earnest money but he failed to execute the sale deed. It is stated that during the pendency of the present petition, a compromise has been effected between the parties. Compromise deed has been attached as Annexure P-1. Mr.Sanjay Gupta has appeared for respondents No.2 and 3 Gurdev Singh and Balkar Singh. They are present in Court. Mr.Gupta has identified Gurdev Singh and Balkar Singh. Mr.Sanjay Gupta state that trial has not concluded and Gurdev Singh and Balkar Singh have received the amount with necessary interest and, therefore, they do not wish to pursue the present FIR and have no objection if the present FIR is quashed. Believing the statements of counsel for the parties that trial has not concluded and relying upon what has been stated by Gurdev Singh and Balkar Singh, it is a fit case where FIR can be quashed along with all subsequent proceedings. It has been held in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that where a compromise has been effected between the parties, continuation of criminal proceedings will serve no useful purpose. Therefore, the impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed. However, it is abundantly made clear that if trial has concluded, no benefit shall accrue to the petitioner. Petition is disposed off. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) March 10, 2008. JUDGE RC Crl.Misc.No.M-2792 of 2009 [3]