Criminal Misc. No. M-11805 of 2011 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. M- 11805 of 2011 Date of Decision: 27.5.2011 Bhim Raj …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sandeep S. Mann, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Mr.Saurabh Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 330 dated 8.9.2005, registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 323, 324 and 506 IPC on the basis of affidavit (Annexure P3), wherein the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties has been admitted. In the present case, the impugned FIR was lodged by respondent No.2-Vikram Singh, wherein it was stated that he was posted as a Store Keeper at Haryana Warehouse Corporation, Kurukshetra. On 5.9.2005 at about 7.00 P.M., when he had gone to the market to purchase a softy ice cream, his neighbourer Bhim Raj came Criminal Misc. No. M-11805 of 2011 2 there and started abusing and threatening him. When the complainant restrained the petitioner, he gave five/six blows of knife on the left arm below his shoulder. Admittedly, the petitioner gave simple injuries to the complainant. In response to the present petition, a short reply has been filed by way of affidavit of the complainant wherein it has been stated that due to intervention of the respectables of the locality, the matter has been amicably settled. Vikram Singh, complainant, is present in Court. He has been identified by his counsel Mr. Saurabh Bajaj, Advocate. Learned counsel for the complainant/respondent No.2 has submitted that the accused and complainant are neighbourers. They intend to promote everlasting peace, amity and harmony. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held as under:- “28. 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 reduces 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 by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the Criminal Misc. No. M-11805 of 2011 3 event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation. 29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. 30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para- meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly Criminal Misc. No. M-11805 of 2011 4 and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and everlasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.” Taking totality of the circumstances into consideration, especially the fact that the complainant has suffered simple injuries; the dispute has been resolved amicably as the parties intend to promote social harmony and the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the present petition is accepted. The impugned FIR along with all its consequential proceedings is quashed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 27, 2011 “DK”