IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-11352 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : September 03, 2009. Manpreet Singh son of Mehar Singh, resident of Village Badduwal, Police Station Dharamkot, Tehsil and District Moga. (Now confined in Central Jail, Ferozepur). ...... Petitioners . Versus. The State of Punjab, and others. ..... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner . Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, A.A.G., Punjab, for the respondent No. 1-State. Mr. Govinder Brar, Advocate, for the respondents No. 2 and 3. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). The present petition is for quashing of F.I.R. No. 25, dated 19.02.2008, under Sections 308/323 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise, which has been entered into between the parties. Counsel for the petitioner contends that it was primarily a dispute within family and complainant-respondent No. 2 is the mother of the petitioner and injured-respondent No. 3 Sukhdeep Singh is the brother of the petitioner. He contends that during the pendency of the case, the parties have entered into a compromise with the intervention of relatives and friends and the dispute has now been amicably resolved. He further contends that on Criminal Misc. No. M-11352 of 2009. the basis of compromise, which has been entered into between the parties, now complainant and injured i.e. respondent Nos. 2 and 3 do not want to pursue the matter any further and have no objection, if the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. Upon notice of motion having been issued by this Court, respondents No. 2 and 3 have filed their reply by way of affidavit in this Court, which is taken on record. As per the said affidavit, they have admitted the factum that a compromise has been entered into between the parties and also the fact that in acceptance of that fact, they had earlier submitted their affidavits dated 15.04.2009, which have been attached with the main petition as Annexure-P-2 and Annexure-P-3 respectively. In the light of said affidavits, counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 3 states that the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. Respondent No. 2-complainant Nasib Kaur wd/o Mehar Singh and respondent No. 3-injured Sukhdeep Singh son of Mehar Singh, are present in the Court. H.C. Jaswinder Singh, Police Station Dharamkot, is present in the Court, who identified the complainant-respondent No. 2 Smt. Nasib Kaur and injured-respondent No. 2 Sukhdeep Singh. On being asked as to whether the compromise has been entered into between the parties, they have answered in affirmative and have further stated that they do not want to pursue the allegations made against the petitioner in the F.I.R. and also that they do not have any objection of quashing of the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Counsel for the respondent No. 1-State also does not have any objection in the light of compromise having been entered into between the -2- Criminal Misc. No. M-11352 of 2009. parties as it was primarily a family dispute between the two brothers and complainant, who is mother of the petitioner. In the light of compromise, which has been entered into between the parties and this being a family dispute between the brothers and complainant being mother, the matter having been amicably resolved, it would be in the interest of justice that the F.I.R. in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed as the continuance of the proceedings would add difficulties to the petitioner as well as respondents No. 2 and 3, which ultimately are not likely to conclude soon. Reliance can be made upon the Larger Bench Judgment of this Court in the case Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non-compoundable offences, has held as under :- “28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation. 29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar -3- Criminal Misc. No. M-11352 of 2009. under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.” In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. Consequently, impugned F.I.R. No. 25, dated 19.02.2008, under Sections 308/323 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE September 03, 2009. sjks. -4-