Crl. Misc. No.M-11748 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-11748 of 2011 Date of Decision: 18 - 5 - 2011 Jaswinder Singh and others .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.K.S.Kahlon, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Bhullar, AAG, Punjab. Mr.Ajay Arora, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of case FIR No.38 dated 20.3.2011 registered at Police Station Bullowal, Distt. Hoshiarpur under Sections 452, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties. In the present case, the FIR was lodged on the basis of statement made by Harjinder Kaur - respondent No.2. She stated that on 17.3.2011 at 8.00 P.M., she was cooking food in the kitchen when accused Crl. Misc. No.M-11748 of 2011 [2] came and had caused injuries to her and her nephew Gurpreet Singh. Mr.Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General appearing for the State has produced the medico legal reports of Harjinder Kaur and Gurpreet Singh. Harjinder Kaur is said to have suffered three injuries. Injury No.1 was an incised wound of very small dimension on the side of the abdomen. The injury was stated to be superficial. Injury No.2 was pain on the wrist, whereas injury No.3 was a bruise on back of right forearm. Gurpreet Singh had suffered an abrasion 6-7 cm x 0.5 cm x muscle deep on the parietal region of scalp. Mr.Bhullar, on instructions, from HC Bikramjit Singh, Police Station Bullowal states that as per prosecution the injuries suffered by Harjinder Kaur and Gurpreet Singh are simple in nature and fall within Section 323 IPC. Mr.Bhullar further states that on the side of the accused- petitioners, accused Amarjit Singh had also suffered an injury. Today, Mr.Ajay Arora, Advocate has caused appearance for the complainant-injured-respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 and has filed reply on their behalf supported by their respective affidavits. Respondents No.2 and 3, namely, Harjinder Kaur and Gurpreet Singh are present in Court. They have also been identified by HC Bikramjit Singh, Police Station Bullowal. They have also stated that being neighbours and co-villagers, they do not intend to pursue the FIR and the same be quashed. Taking into consideration the nature of injuries suffered by the complainant and her nephew Gurpreet Singh, this Court shall take the compromise into consideration, especially when the same has been vouchsafed by their counsel Mr.Ajay Arora. It has been contended by the parties that they have resolved to bury their hatchet and maintain amity, Crl. Misc. No.M-11748 of 2011 [3] harmony and everlasting peace. It is further stated that continuation of the proceedings arising out of the FIR are creating hurdle in the resumption of smooth relations. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 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 under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. 30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its Crl. Misc. No.M-11748 of 2011 [4] inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.” In the present case, only simple injuries were received by the complainant and her nephew Gurpreet Singh. Taking into account the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) May 18, 2011. JUDGE RC