IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-36193 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.2.2010 Surinder Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.H.S.Ghauran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. Mr.B.S.Randhawa, Advocate for respondent No.2. Sabina J. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’) for quashing of the FIR No.16 dated 221.2005, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short ‘IPC’) registered at Police Station Hariana District Hoshiarpur and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise with the intervention of relatives and friends. Respondent No.2-Munish Kumar and his injured mother- Bimla are present in the Court along with their counsel and have admitted the factum of compromise between the parties and have tendered their affidavits, as per which, they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulvinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where Crl.Misc.No.M-36193 of 2009 (O&M) the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon’ble the Apx Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos.23 and 24 has held as under:- “23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised? 24. On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S.Joshi’s case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filed by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.” Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. 2 Crl.Misc.No.M-36193 of 2009 (O&M) Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No.16 dated 221.2005, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short ‘IPC’) registered at Police Station Hariana District Hoshiarpur and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. [ Sabina ] Judge 15.02.2010 sd 3