CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision : December 08, 2011 CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 Gurbachan Dass .... PETITIONER Vs. State of Punjab and another ..... RESPONDENTS CRM No. M-15069 of 2009 (O&M) Parkash Kaur and another .... PETITIONERS Vs. State of Punjab and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH * * * Present : Mr. Sandeep Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. * * * AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) By this order, I propose to dispose of CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and CRM No. M-15069 of 2009. For convenience, facts are being mentioned from CRM No. M-13432 of 2009. CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 2 Prayer in this petition is for quashing of Complaint No. 141/1/07 dated 29.05.2007 filed by respondent No. 2-Pawan Kumar son of Nasib Chand, who is nephew of Gurbachan Dass (petitioner in CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 ) under Sections 452, 448, 380, 323, 427, 342, 506, 148, 149 IPC and the summoning order dated 25.02.2009 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balachaur, whereby the petitioner had been summoned under Sections 323, 427, 379, 452 read with Section 149 IPC and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the petition, a compromise dated 19.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) has been entered into between the petitioner and the complainant, copy of which is appended in Crl. Misc. No. 13432 of 2009, and as per the said compromise, the dispute, which was primarily relating to a path, has been amicably settled they being close relatives and it has been decided that all litigation initiated against each other shall be withdrawn by both the parties. Counsel for respondent No. 2 admits the factum of agreement/compromise dated 19.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) and states that in the light of this compromise, he has specific instructions from Pawan Kumar son of Nasib Chand-respondent No. 2 to make a statement in Court that he has no objection to the quashing of the complaint and the summoning order along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 3 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 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. CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 4 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 view of the agreement/compromise dated 19.10.2011 entered into between the petitioner and respondent No. 2- complainant and the matter having been amicably resolved which was primarily between two close relatives as complainant-respondent No. 2 is the nephew of Gurbachan Dass (petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-13432 of 2009), the interest of justice would be duly served by putting an end to the litigation, which has been continuing between the parties. In view of the agreement/compromise dated 19.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) and in the light of the statement made by the counsel for the parties, both the petitions are allowed. Complaint No. 141/1/07 dated 29.05.2007 filed by respondent No. 2-Pawan Kumar son of Nasib Chand, who is nephew of Gurbachan Dass (petitioner in CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 ) under Sections 452, 448, 380, 323, 427, 342, 506, 148, 149 IPC and the summoning order dated 25.02.2009 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balachaur, whereby the petitioners had been summoned under CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 5 Sections 323, 427, 379, 452 read with Section 149 IPC and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) December 08, 2011 JUDGE pj CRM No. M-13432 of 2009 and connected case 6