IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-5155 of 2011 Date of decision: 1.8.2011 Sukhdeep Singh alias Bagga ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Ors. ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the appellant/petitioner. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl.AG, Punjab. None for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. **** SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No. 57 dated 4.5.2008 under Sections 307, 397, 326, 325, 323, 341, 427, 506, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' short) Police Station Dehlon District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was juvenile at the time of occurrence and his trial was separated from the other co-accused. The other co-accused had filed Crl.Misc. No. 8953 of 2010 seeking quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise and the said petition was allowed vide order dated 12.5.2010 (Annexure P-3) and the FIR qua other co-accused was quashed. Now the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 22.2.2011 this Court directed the trial Court to record the statements of the CRM No. M-5155 of 2011 -2- parties and report qua genuineness of the compromise. In pursuance of the said order the trial Court after recording the statements of the parties has reported that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (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 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 Apex 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 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 facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the CRM No. M-5155 of 2011 -3- 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 indicatedhereinabove 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 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 the criminal proceedings to continue. Moreover, since the FIR in question has already been quashed qua the other co-accused and the present petitioner was juvenile at the time of the occurrence, it would be just and expedient to quash FIR in question. Accordingly this petition is allowed and the FIR No. 57 dated 4.5.2008 under Sections 307, 397, 326, 325, 323, 341, 427, 506, 148, 149 of IPC Police Station Dehlon District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. (SABINA) 01.08.2011 JUDGE Poonam(II)