CRM No. M-17053 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-17053 of 2010 Date of Decision : October 17, 2011 Amit Garg and others .... PETITIONERS Vs. State of Haryana and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH * * * Present : Mr. Tarun Garg, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Raja Sharma, AAG, Haryana. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. * * * AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of FIR No. 265 dated 19.04.2010 under Sections 406, 498-A, 506, 323 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station City Sirsa, District Sirsa (Annexurre P-1). It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioners that during the pendency of the case, a compromise has been entered into between the parties. As per the said compromise, an amount of ` 25 lacs was to be CRM No. M-17053 of 2010 2 paid to complainant-respondent No. 2 Nisha Rani. An amount of ` 15 lacs was paid to her in cash on 17.05.2010 and two cheques amounting to ` 5 lacs each were handed over to her. As per the said compromise, the parties were to file a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In pursuance to the compromise, a petition under Section 13-B of the Act was filed for divorce by mutual consent. The said petition has been accepted and a decree dated 13.10.2011 has been passed by the District Judge, Sirsa. He contends that in the light of the compromise entered into between the parties and the decree of divorce dated 13.10.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Sirsa, the present petition be allowed by quashing the FIR registered against the petitioners. Counsel for respondent No. 2-complainant-Smt. Nisha Rani, states that the complainant has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in the light of the compromise. The fact with regard to receipt of the amount as per the compromise and the ultimate grant of decree of divorce by mutual consent is not disputed. A Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non-compoundable offence(s), 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 CRM No. M-17053 of 2010 3 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 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.” In the light of the compromise, which has been entered into between the parties, the continuation of the present proceedings in the FIR registered against the petitioners by respondent No. 2-complainant Smt. Nisha Rani would not be conducive to the interest of parties where they have agreed to mutually bring an end to the dispute between them. The Larger Bench of this Court has also given an indication that if such be a situation, the proceedings be brought to an end. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 265 dated 19.04.2010 under Sections 406, 498-A, 506, 323 and 34 IPC CRM No. M-17053 of 2010 4 registered at Police Station City Sirsa, District Sirsa (Annexurre P-1), is hereby quashed as also all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) October 17, 2011 JUDGE pj