Crl.Misc.No.M-13076 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Misc.No.M-13076 of 2009 Date of Decision: 30.11.2009 Dr.Harjit Singh Bhatia .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr. H.S. Baath, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab for respondent no1. Mr. Sunil Sharma, Advocate for respondents no.2 to 4. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No.222 dated 19.7.2001, at Police Station Civil Lines, Distt. Amritsar registered under Sections 307, 452, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for respondents no.2 to 4 submit that though initially the FIR was registered under Section 307, 452,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code, charges have been framed under Sections 323,324,148 and 149 IPC. However, as the petitioner and respondents no.2 to 4 have settled their differences by way of a bonafide compromise, the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. Crl.Misc.No.M-13076 of 2009 2 The complainant-respondent no.2 Harsh Vivek Singh S/o Professor Mohinder Singh, resident of 24, Lajpat Nagar, Nawan Shahr,Punjab is present in court and has been identified by his counsel. He has filed an affidavit dated 27.10.2009 in court today, which is taken on record. Harsh Vivek Singh states that he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Sunil Malhotra and Saurabh Sharma, respondents no.3 and 4 have also filed affidavits dated 29.8.2009 and 11.7.2009 respectively accepting the compromise. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as parties have entered into a compromise, the State does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the FIR and the affidavits filed by respondent no.2 to 4 and am of the considered opinion that as the petitioner and respondents no.2 to 4 have resolved their differences amicably by a bonafide compromise, free from any fraud, coercion or undue influence, the continuation of a trial would be an exercise in futility. A compromise or a settlement, serves the immediate purpose of parties as it enables them to proceed with their lives without illwill or rancour and in peace and harmony. In view of the compromise, the witnesses are not likely to support the prosecution and therefore, to permit prosecution to carry on would, in my considered opinion be an exercise in futility and an unnecessary wastage of public money and valuable court time. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others V. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, has held that, in the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Crl.Misc.No.M-13076 of 2009 3 this Court may in appropriate cases, quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non compoundable offences. Though the FIR was lodged under Sections 307,452,148 and 149 IPC, charges have been framed under Sections 323,324,148 and 149 IPC. In view of what has been stated herein above, as the prayer for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom does not suffer from any legal impediment, the present petition is allowed and the FIR No. 222 dated 19.7.2001, registered under Sections 307, 452, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, in which challan was presented and charges were framed under Sections 323,324,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Civil Lines, Distt. Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. 30.11.2009 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE