IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-27011 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 24.10.2009 Dr.V.K.Mujral ....Petitioner(s) vs. State of Punjab and another ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.P.S.Khurana, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr.Simran Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. The present petition is for quashing of FIR No.96 dated 20.7.2009 under Section 304-A IPC registered at Police Station City Fazilka, District Ferozepur and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise, copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. Counsel for the petitioner contends that during the pendency of the FIR, a compromise (Annexure P-2 )has been entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.2-complainant. In acknowledgment of the said compromise, the complainant Pawan son of Krishan Lal has given an affidavit dated 10.9.2009 (Annexure P-3). He, on this basis, submits that the complainant having entered into a compromise with the petitioner does not want to pursue the matter and has no objection if the FIR and Crl.Misc.No.M-27011 of 2009 (O&M) -2- all consequential proceedings are quashed and thus the same deserves to be quashed. Reply on behalf of the State has also been filed in Court wherein the factum of compromise having been entered into between the parties has been accepted. It has further been stated in the affidavit that the complainant Pawan Kumar has already submitted an affidavit to the prosecution as also an affidavit dated 25.7.2009 has been given by Shanti Devi, mother of deceased-Mirchu wherein it has been stated that they do not have any objection to the quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings and they are not interested in pursuing the matter any further in the light of the compromise which has been entered into between the parties. Short reply in the form of an affidavit dated 20.10.2009 has been filed in Court on behalf of Pawan son of Krishan Lal-respondent No.2 complainant which is taken on record. On the basis of the said affidavit, counsel for respondent No.2 states that the complainant has entered into a compromise with the petitioner and therefore, does not have any objection if the FIR in question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Pawan son of Krishan Lal is present in Court and has been identified by his counsel. He also acknowledges the factum of the compromise dated 10.9.2009 (Annexure P-3). He states that he does not have any objection if the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed in the light of the compromise and that he does not want to further pursue the matter. In view of the fact that an amicable resolution of the dispute has taken place and the compromise has been entered into between the Crl.Misc.No.M-27011 of 2009 (O&M) -3- parties which factum has been admitted by the parties and the complainant does not want to pursue the matter any further nor does he have any objection to the quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, it would, thus, be in the interest of justice that the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed. A Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non-compoundable offence(s), 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 Crl.Misc.No.M-27011 of 2009 (O&M) -4- 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.” Therefore, in view of the discussion above, since the parties have amicably settled the matter, which is otherwise in the interest of justice and appears to have been effected to promote peace and harmony amongst the parties, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, impugned FIR No.96 dated 20.7.2009 under Sections304-A IPC registered at Police Station City Fazilka, District Ferozepur and all other consequent proceedings therein are quashed. October 24, 2009 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE