Crl. Misc. No. M- 13232 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 13232of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 22, 2010 Jagsir Singh ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ........Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Rajesh Bhatheja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Gurjinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the FIR No.21 dated 21.02.2006 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 307, 336, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short IPC), registered at Police Station Sadar, District- Mogar on the basis of compromise between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in terms of the order passed by this Court on 06.05.2010 petitioner has surrendered before the trial Court and has been released on interim bail. Co-accused Lakhvir Singh, who had faced the trial, has since been acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 08.07.2009 (Annexure P-2). No injury was attributed to the petitioner. The injury on the complainant was attributed to Lakhvir Singh, who has since been acquitted. Crl. Misc. No. M- 13232 of 2010 (O&M) 2 Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the relatives and friends with a view to move on in life by putting an end to their litigation. Respondent No.2, who is present in person along with his counsel, has admitted the factum of compromise between him and the petitioner. He has also admitted the contents of the affidavit (Annexure P-4) wherein it has been stated that there is no objection if, the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos.26 and 24 has held as under :- “26. 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 the 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 facts. 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 the Court in B.S. Joshi's case Crl. Misc. No. M- 13232 of 2010 (O&M) 3 (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled 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 in allowing these criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The FIR No.21 Dated 21.02.2006, under Sections 307, 336, 506, 34 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Sadar, District- Moga and consequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed. (SABINA) July 22, 2010 JUDGE sharmila