Criminal Misc. No.M- 4417 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M- 4417 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.04.2009 Kulbir Singh @ Gokha and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. Mr.Vikas Kumar Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C. for short) for quashing FIR No.163 dated 10.5.2004 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 295, 341, 323, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Nakodar, District Jalandhar in view of the compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Criminal Misc. No.M- 4417 of 2009 (O&M) 2 parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the relatives and respectables of the area. Compromise dated 7.2.2009 duly signed by the parties is annexed as Annexure P-2. A perusal of the same reveals that the matter between the parties has been compromised. Affidavit of respondent No.2 is annexed as Annexure P-3. A perusal of the same reveals that due to compromise having been effected between the parties, respondent No.2 has no objection in case the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed. Respondent No.2 is present in person along with his counsel and has admitted the contents of the compromise (Annexure P-2) as well as affidavit (Annexure P-3). 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 Criminal Misc. No.M- 4417 of 2009 (O&M) 3 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 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 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 Criminal Misc. No.M- 4417 of 2009 (O&M) 4 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 proceedings to continue. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.163 dated 10.5.2004 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 295, 341, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Nakodar, District Jalandhar and all the subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed. (SABINA) JUDGE April 01, 2009 anita