CRM-M NO.5278 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M NO.5278 of 2009 Date of decision:1.04.2009 Gurmit Singh and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. A.S.Manaise, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.C.S.Brar, DAG, Punjab for respondent no. 1. Mr. T.S.Khehra, Advocate for respondent no. 2. RAJIVE BHALLA, J.(Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing of FIR No. 83, dated 8.05.2006,registered under Sections 498-A, 406 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Civil Line Batala, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur, and all the proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of affidavit, filed by the complainant. Counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the complainant-respondent no. 2, state that petitioner no. 1 and the complainant, who are husband and wife have settled their dispute and are living together. It is prayed that in view of the affidavit filed by the complainant-respondent no.2 (Annexure P-'5'), the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the affidavit filed by the complainant-respondent no. 2 and find no reason to doubt the bonafides thereof. Gurmit Singh, petitioner no. 1 and Sonia, the 1 CRM-M NO.5278 of 2009 Complainant are present in Court and have been identified by their respective counsel. Both Gurmeet Singh and Ms. Sonia, acknowledge the correctness of the compromise and submit that they have resumed cohabitation Ms. Sonia, states that she has no objection, if the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. A compromise or a settlement serves the immediate purpose of parties, as it enables them to proceed with their lives without ill will or rancour and in peace and harmony. In view of the compromise, the prosecution witnesses are not likely to support the prosecution and to continue with the trial would be a wastage of public money and valuable Court time. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a similar controversy, in B.S.Joshi and others V. State of Haryana and another, 2003(2) RCR(Criminal) 888, has held that in cases arising from a matrimonial disputes, where parties have settled their dispute, by a bonafide settlement, the High Court in the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would be justified in quashing proceedings emanating from matrimonial disputes, even where the offences complained of are non-compoundable. Consequently, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is allowed and the FIR No. 83, dated 8.05.2006,registered under Sections 498-A, 406 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Civil Line Batala, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur, and all consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. [RAJIVE BHALLA] JUDGE 1st April, 2009 SKaushik 2