Crl.Misc.No.M-6236 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-6236 of 2009 Date of Decision: 16 - 3 - 2009 Krishan Sharma .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.R.K.Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Mehardeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. Ms.Samapti Chugh, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No.133 dated 26.7.2007 registered at Police Station Zirakpur under Section 420 IPC on the ground that petitioner is ready and willing to refund back Rs.50,000/- received from complainant- respondent No.2 as token money. Today counsel appearing for the petitioner has stated that during the pendency of the present petition, a compromise has been arrived, to the effect that an amount of Rs.50,000/- be returned along with interest and expenses suffered by the complainant. Therefore, a bank draft Crl.Misc.No.M-6236 of 2009 [2] amounting to Rs.65,000/- has been handed over to the complainant. Gurcharan Singh complainant-respondent No.2 is present in Court. He has been identified by his counsel Ms.Samapti Chugh. She has stated that demand draft No.897325 dated 13.3.2009 has been received by complainant Gurcharan Singh – respondent No.2 and he does not want to pursue the present FIR. Complainant Gurcharan Singh has also been identified by ASI Joginder Singh who has come present in Court to assist counsel for the State. A perusal of the FIR reveal that Gurcharan Singh, complainant- respondent No.2 had made a grievance that he was made to part with Rs.50,000/- by the petitioner on the pretext that he will sell his house to the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner Mr.R.K.Singla and counsel for the complainant Ms.Samapti Chugh have stated that the matter has been resolved and continuation of FIR will serve no useful purpose. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that where a compromise has been effected between the parties, continuation of criminal proceedings will serve no useful purpose. Taking into consideration the statement made by counsel for the parties and the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), the present petition is accepted. The impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) March 16, 2009. JUDGE RC