CRM No. M 35560 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 35560 of 2010 Date of decision: 18.01.2011 Prince Nandrayog and others ........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab Mr. Paramjit Singh, Advocate for respondent No 2 -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 130 dated 12.06.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406, 316 IPC, PS City Ferozepur, District Ferozepur as well as the subsequent proceedings arisen therein on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 03.12.2010, the parties were directed to appear before the trial court on 14.12.2010. Simultaneously, the trial Court was also directed to record a finding whether any volunteer compromise has CRM No. M 35560 of 2010 2 been arrived at between the parties or not. Report of the trial court was also called for. In pursuance to the said order, vide letter dated 17.12.2010, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur, submitted his report stating therein that he got recorded the statement of both the parties. As per their statements, the parties have effected compromise with each other. The parties do not intend to proceed further with the present litigation and they making statements without any pressure upon them. In the report, it is also stated that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine one. From the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, it is amply clear that the matter has been compromised and the parties do not wish to proceed with the present litigation. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “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 reduced 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 exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.” CRM No. M 35560 of 2010 3 The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” Taking into account the allegations as well as report dated 17.12.10 furnished by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur, authenticating the matter having compromised between the parties, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 130 dated 12.06.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406, 316 IPC, PS City Ferozepur, District Ferozepur and further proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 18.01.2011 mohan