Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) 1 [IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision : 11.5.2011 Balraj Singh alias Baji ......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. J. J. S. Uppal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Munish Kumar, Addl. A. G. Punjab. **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.12 dated 02.06.2010 under Sections 324/323 IPC and Section 326 IPC (later on added), registered at Police Station Sandhaur District Sangrur and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2), entered between the parties. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant-Surjit Singh has made a statement to the effect that he is agriculturist and on 24.05.2010, round about 1.00 p.m, he was sitting under the tree of Toot in his field. Then Balraj Singh @ Baji (Petitioner) was working in his field, whose filed is also adjoining to his field and throw him on the ground after coming and gave him soti blows under the tree of Toot. Then he (Baji) gave a blow on him with soti or Takua fitted in the Soti on his (Surjit-complainant) left arm, he fell on the ground. Then he (complainant) entered inside of his room, Baji also tried to enter in his room, thereafter Balraj Singh ran away from Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) 2 there. He caused him injuries in the presence of Sarpanch Twar Singh. After that, his daughter Kuldeep Kaur brought him in Civil Hospital Malerkotla on vehicle for treatment. He (complainant) got admitted in the hospital and is under treatment. In the above background, F.I.R was registered against the petitioner. However, during the pendency of investigation, both the parties arrived at a compromise with the intervention of respectables and decided to end the matter and to live in peace and harmony. Now the petitioner does not want to proceed with the above mentioned F.I.R. Copy of compromise is annexed as Annexure P-2. In compliance of order dated 11.02.2011, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Malerkotla has sent a report verifying the contents of the compromise. As per this report, statement of both the parties have been recorded in which they have stated that they have entered into compromise and complainant does not wish to pursue with the matter any further and has no objection to quash the said FIR. Both the parties have admitted the factum of compromise. So compromise appears to be voluntarily and fair. Broad guidelines have been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 for quashing the prosecution when parties entered into compromise. The Full Bench has observed that this power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:- “26. In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, (1980)1 SCC 63, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) 3 words :- “The finest hour of justice arrived propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” 27. The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice. No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) if the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 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 emity 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 Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) 4 which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.” The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 has examined a case where quashing was sought of an FIR under Section 406 IPC being non-compoundable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that :- “1. No useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise – There was no possibility of conviction. 2 It is advisable that in the disputes where question involved is of purely personal nature and no public policy is involved – Court should ordinarily accept the compromise. 3. Keeping the matter alive with no possibility of conviction is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford.” Consequently, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab (supra) and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another (supra), FIR No.12 dated 02.06.2010 under Sections 324/323, 326 IPC, registered at Police Station Sandhaur District Sangrur is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner. The petition stands disposed of. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE May 11, 2011 Savita Crl. Misc. No. M-4469 of 2011(O&M) 5