Crl.Misc.No.M-25969 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Misc.No.M-25969 of 2009 Date of Decision: 30.11.2009 Manga Masih .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and another ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr. M.K. Bhatnagar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab for respondent no1. Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent no.2. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No.57 dated 16.4.2001, registered under Sections 326,324,323,34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Majitha, Distt. Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the injury was to a non vital part i.e. the hand, the petitioner and the complainant have resolved their differences by way of a written compromise dated 1.9.2009, the FIR and all proceedings pending pursuant thereto be quashed. The complainant-respondent no.2 Surjit Singh S/o Wasan Singh resident of Village Tarpai, Tehsil and District Amritsar is present in Crl.Misc.No.M-25969 of 2009 2 court and has been duly identified by his counsel. He has filed an affidavit dated 30.11.2009 in Court today, which is taken on record and assigned mark `A'. Surjit Singh acknowledges the correctness of the compromise and states that he has no objection, if the FIR is quashed. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as parties have entered into a compromise, the State does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the FIR, the compromise dated 1.9.2009 (Annexure P-1) and the affidavit filed by Surjit Singh, respondent no.2 dated 30.11.2009 and am of the considered opinion that as the petitioner and respondents no.2 have resolved their differences amicably and by a bonafide compromise, free from any fraud, coercion or undue influence, the continuation of a trial would be an exercise in futility. A compromise or a settlement, enables parties to proceed with their lives without illwill, rancour and in peace and harmony. In view of the compromise, witnesses are not likely to support the prosecution and therefore, to permit prosecution to carry on would, in my considered opinion be an exercise in futility and an unnecessary wastage of public money and valuable court time. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others V. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, has held that, in the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court may in appropriate cases, quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non compoundable offences. In view of what has been stated herein above, as the prayer for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom Crl.Misc.No.M-25969 of 2009 3 does not suffer from any legal impediment, the present petition is allowed and the FIR No.57 dated 16.4.2001, registered under Sections 326,324,323,34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Majitha, Distt. Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. 30.11.2009 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE