Crl. Misc. No. M- 23976 of 2008 {1} In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 23976 of 2008 Date of Decision:April 22, 2009 Vijay Dhawean & another ---Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr.O.P.Nagpal,Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG,Punjab Mr.Ashok Khichi, Advocate, for respondent No. 2 *** SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.')for quashing of FIR No. 205 dated 18.9.2001 under Sections 420/ 409/120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that FIR in question was registered against the petitioners due to monetary dispute. Now the petitioners have settled their accounts with respondent No. 2. Perusal of para 4 of the reply filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 reveals that the case of the petitioners was considered by the corporation Crl. Misc. No. M- 23976 of 2008 {2} under a scheme to settle the cases of defaulters under the One Time Settlement Scheme. Petitioners have paid the entire settlement amount with minor delay which was condoned by the corporation. Certificate dated 27.3.2003 was issued by the corporation stating therein that the loan amount has been adjusted in full and nothing is due from the petitioners, subject to audit. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has submitted that since the accounts of the petitioners have been settled, respondent No. 2 has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in paras 23 and 24 has held as under:- “23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the Crl. Misc. No. M- 23976 of 2008 {3} limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised? 24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S.Joshi's case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.” Since the parties have settled their accounts, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, in question. Accordingly this petition is allowed. FIR No. 205 dated 18.9.2001 under Sections 420/ 409/120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana and all consequential proceeding arising therefrom are quashed. (SABINA) JUDGE April 22, 2009 PARAMJIT