IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc. No. M- 27144 of 2009 (O&M) Gurpreet Kaur and others ......Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and another ...Respondents AND Crl.Misc.No.M -33357 of 2009 Khushwant Singh and others .....Petitioners. Vs. State of Punjab and another ....Respondents. Date of decision: 3.2.2010. CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY. PRESENT: Mr.Amardeep Singh Gill,Advocate, for petitioners in Crl.Misc.No.M-27144 of 2009 Mr.Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for petitioners in crl.Misc.No.M-33357 of 2009 Mr.Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl.AG, Punjab. **** ORDER Crl.Misc.No.5062-63 of 2010 are allowed as prayed. Crl. Misc.No.M-27144 of 2009 has been filed by Gurpreet Kaur, Gurnek Singh, Sarabjit Kaur and Jaswinder Kaur petitioners whereas Crl.Misc.No.M-33357 of 2009 has been filed Khushwant Singh, Harjinder Singh and Rajwinder Kaur and Jarnail Singh petitioners for quashing of FIR No.224 dated 11.7.2009 under Sections 420/120-B IPC registered at Police Station Division No.4, District Jalandhar against Gurpreet Singh etc. FIR No.209 dated 4.8.2009 under Sections 406/498-A/380/506 IPC registered at Police Station Banga, District Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawanshahr) Crl.Misc. No. M- 27144 of 2009 and [2] Crl.Misc.No.M -33357 of 2009 against Khuswant Singh etc. on the basis of compromise between the parties. Both the parties are present in Court who have been identified by their respective counsel. Learned counsel for the parties have stated that the matter has been compromised between the parities as is clear from the compromise deeds Annexure P-6 with Crl.Misc.No. 5063 of 2010 and Annexure P-2 with Crl.Misc.No.M 33357 of 2009. Learned counsel for the complainant has also not controverted the said compromise between the parties and nothing remains as the matter has amicably been settled between the parties. It has been observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney (1980)1 SCC 63 that “the finest Hour of Justice arrives propitiously when the parties, despite following apart bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” Relying on the views adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Five Judges Bench of this Court also observed in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2007(3) R.C.R. (Cri) 1052 that compounding of offence which are not compoundable under Section 320(9) Cr.P.C., offence non- compoundable but parties entering into compromise, High Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non- compoundable offences and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. Crl.Misc. No. M- 27144 of 2009 and [3] Crl.Misc.No.M -33357 of 2009 Keeping in view the fact that both the parties have effected a compromise and continuance of proceedings before the trial Court will be an abuse of the process of the Court, the petitions are allowed and FIR No.224 dated 11.7.2009 under Sections 420/120-B IPC registered at Police Station Division No.4, District Jalandhar against Gurpreet Singh etc. and FIR No.209 dated 4.8.2009 under Sections 406/498-A/380/506 IPC registered at Police Station Banga, District Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawanshahr) against Khuswant Singh etc. and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. The petitions are disposed of accordingly. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE February 3, 2010. raghav