IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-8262 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: September 01, 2011 Nishant Sood and others …..Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr.Piyush Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner s Mr.Shilesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab .. RAJAN GUPTA, J.: (Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.84 dated 17.11.2010 (Annexure P-1) registered under sections 498A/406/506 IPC at police station City Malerkotla, District Sangrur and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). Learned counsel for the parties submit that during the pendency of this petition, a compromise was effected between the petitioners and respondent No.2- complainant. Relying upon the judgment reported as Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, learned counsel submit that in view of compromise, the FIR in question deserves to be quashed. Learned State counsel does not dispute the ratio of judgment in Kulwinder Singh’s case (supra) and submits that in case a compromise is arrived at between the parties, the State shall not stand in the way of quashing of FIR. Heard. It appears that while issuing notice of motion a direction was issued by this court to record the statements Crl.Misc.No.M-8262 of 2011 - 2 - of the parties with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise. A report has been received from the trial court. Operative part thereof reads thus: “Statements of complainant Shaweta Sood and accused Nishant Sood, Bhushan Kumar Sood and Anita Sood were recorded, in which they have stated that they have compromised the matter regarding FIR No.84 dated 17.11.2010, registered under section 498-A,406 and 506 IPC at Police Station City Malerkotla.” The statement of complainant recorded by the court below is follows:- “Stated that FIR No.84 dated 17.11.2010, under Sections 498-A,406 and 506 IPC was registered on my statement at Police Station City, Malerkotla, against accused Nishant Sood, Bhushan Kumar and Anita Sood. The matter in dispute qua FIR referred above has been compromised between the parties with the intervention of respectables and the said compromise is made without any pressure. In view of the compromise, I have no objection if the present FIR is quashed and the quashing petition filed by the accused before Hon’ble High Court is accepted.” The compromise is in the interest of parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served by continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in light of Full Bench judgment of this court in Kulwinder Singh’s case (supra). 2 Crl.Misc.No.M-8262 of 2011 - 3 - Resultantly, the petition is allowed. The FIR in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. September 01, 2011 ( RAJAN GUPTA ) pc JUDGE 3