IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-34856 of 2009 Date of decision:March 02, 2010 Pargat Singh and others Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of cross version bearing Rapat No. 31 dated 12.5.2007 under Sections 336/447/148/149 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act registered in case FIR No. 112 dated 12.5.2007 under Sections 336/148/149 IPC and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3) between the parties. Respondent No. 2 – Wassan Singh, who has been identified by his counsel, has stated in the Court that the matter has been compromised between the parties and he is not interested in continuing the litigation in future. The affidavit of Wassan Singh has been filed which is annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition. He has specifically stated that compromise has been arrived at with the intervention of the panchayat as well as respectables of the locality and he has no grudge against the accused persons and does not want to pursue the present case further against the accused persons. Crl. Misc. No. M-34856 of 2009 2 In view of the statement made by respondent No. 2, no purpose would be served if the case is tried because as per compromise, respondent No. 2 will not support the case of the prosecution and it will be sheer wastage of precious time of this Court. It has been observed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney vs. Mr. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, 1980(1) SCC 63 that “the finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when the parties, despite following apart bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” Relying on the views adopted by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the Five Judges Bench of this Court also observed in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052, that compounding of offence which are not compoundable under Section 320(9) Cr.P.C. but parties entering into compromise, this Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.PC. to allow compounding of non- compoundable offences and quash the prosecution where the Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. The present one is a case covered by the views observed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the judgment mentioned above and, is therefore, a fit case to quash the FIR. In view of the above, Rapat No. 31 dated 12.5.2007 under Sections 336/447/148/149 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act registered in case FIR No. 112 dated 12.5.2007 under Sections 336/148/149 IPC and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act and all subsequent proceedings arisen out of the same are quashed. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) 02.03.2010 JUDGE reena