CRM-No.M-32504 of 2011(O & M)&CRM-No.M-.32459 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-No.M-32504 of 2011(O & M) Decided on 02.12.2011 Surinder Kaur alias Bholi & another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents AND CRM-No.M-.32459 of 2011 Decided on 02.12.2011 Surinder Kaur alias Bholi ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. D.V.Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G.Punjab. Mr. Gurmit Singh, Advocate for the complainant. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This order shall dispose of two petitions CRM-M-32504 of 2011 Surinder Kaur alias Bholi & another Vs State of Punjab and another (hereinafter referred to as the first petition) and CRM-.M 32459 of 2011 Surinder Kaur alias Bholi vs.. State of Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the second petition) as both have arisen from FIR No.124, Dated 23.3.2000, registered under Sections 454,380,411 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Sadar, CRM-No.M-32504 of 2011(O & M)&CRM-No.M-.32459 of 2011 -2- District Ludhiana, The first petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No.124, Dated 23.3.2000, under Sections 454,380,411 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sadar, District Ludhiana, and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom on the basis of compromise between both the parties, whereas the second petition has been filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail. Pursuant to the notice of motion in first petition Mr. Gurmit Singh Advocate, has put in appearance for respondent No.2- complainant who is also present in the Court in person. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the dispute is pertaining to the theft of television and with the intervention of the respectables the matter has been patched up between the parties. Complainant Madan Lal who is identified by his learned counsel made a submission before this Court that the matter has been compromised and he does not want to prosecute the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that although Section 411 is compoundble in terms of Section 320 (b) Cr.P.C. yet Sections 454 and 380 are non-compoundable, however he invokes the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and prays for quashing of FIR and all the subsequent proceedings by placing reliance on the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and CRM-No.M-32504 of 2011(O & M)&CRM-No.M-.32459 of 2011 -3- keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition is allowed and FIR No. 124, Dated 23.3.2000, registered under Sections 454,380,411 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Sadar, District Ludhiana, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quahsed. In view of the fact that the FIR in question has been quashed in the first petition, therefore, the second petition (CRM-M- 32459 of 2011) has become infructuous and is dismissed as such. The petitioner No.1 is ordered to be released on bail if, she is not required in any other case. Photocopy of this order be also placed in CRM-M-32459 of 2011. 2nd December, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) aarti JUDGE CRM-No.M-32504 of 2011(O & M)&CRM-No.M-.32459 of 2011 -4-