Criminal Misc. No. M- 21893 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 21893 of 2009 Date of decision: December 8, 2009 Tejinder Pal Singh & others -Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & others -Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajan Gupta Present: Mr. SPS Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. GS Pannu, DAG, Punjab. Mr. RK Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. Rajan Gupta, J.(Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of cross version case registered vide Rapat No. 27 under Sections 452/323/325/148/149 IPC in FIR No. 70 dated 28-5-2008 under Sections 452/323/326/148/149 IPC, registered at police station Mehna, District Moga, and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3) arrived at between the parties. Rajinder Singh, Complainant/respondent No. 2, both the injured namely Kuldip Singh & Jaswinder Kaur are present in Court. They are duly identified by their counsel. They have filed thier affidavits in Court today, which are taken on record as Marks 'A', 'B' & 'C' respectively, wherein the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties has been admitted. They have stated that they have no objection if the cross version case is quashed. Criminal Misc. No. M- 21893 of 2009 2 Learned State counsel submits that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, the State would not stand in the way of quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of the above, the cross version case aforesaid and the consequent proceedings deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR ( Crl.) 1052. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed, the cross version case aforesaid and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, if any, are quashed. [Rajan Gupta] Judge December 8, 2009. 'ask'