CRM No. M 11985 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 11985 of 2010 Date of decision: 04.08.2010 Harnarinder Singh ........ petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Amrik Singh Kalra, Advocate for for the petitioner Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.62 dated 17.07.1998 under Sections 353, 355, 186, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitiones on the basis of the compromise dated 10.05.2007 arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as CRM No. M 11985 of 2010 2 Annexure P-3. A separate statement of the complainant to the same effect is also got recorded in the Court. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 17.07.1998, a meeting of Municipal Councillors was held in the office of Municipal Council, Dasuya at 10.00 am. During the meeting, at about 11.00 am, 10/12 persons came there and they opened the door of the said meeting room by kicking the said door. Thereafter, all the accused entered the meeting room and gave threats to the complainant that they will not spare him and he will be done to death. When the accused left the occurrence place, the complainant came to know that his golden chain which he was wearing was missing. He searched for the same but could not find out. Then, he moved a complaint before the police stating therein that action be taken against the accused, including the petitioner as he apprehends danger to his life. On the basis of the written complaint, the present FIR was lodged against the present petitioner and others. Now, with the intervention of the respectables of the area, the matter has been compromised vide compromise deed dated 10.05.2007. In his statement got recorded in this Court today, the complainant has submitted that he has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “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 reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their CRM No. M 11985 of 2010 3 genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.” The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” The compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. Taking into account the allegations, affidavit as well as the statement of the complainant and the matter being totally personal in nature, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same, in view of the well settled above proposition of law. Accordingly, FIR No.62 dated 17.07.1998 under Sections 353, CRM No. M 11985 of 2010 4 355, 186, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and further proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 04.08.2010 mohan