IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-19809 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.08.2009 Balbir Singh son of Sh. Teja Singh and others .....PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Punjab and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab, for respondent No. 1. Mr. H.K.Aurora, Advocate, for respondent No. 2-complainant. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of the FIR No. 201 dated 06.10.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise dated 16.05.2009, which has been entered into between the parties before the Lok Adalat, copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. Crl. Misc. No. M-19809 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Counsel for the petitioners, on the basis of the compromise which has been entered into between the parties before the Lok Adalat, prays for quashing of the FIR. He further submits that the said compromise has been acted upon and the amount of Rs. 3,80,000/- has been paid to the complainant-respondent No. 2 and the petition for grant of divorce by mutual consent is pending before the Court at Hoshiapur. Counsel for respondent No. 2 does not dispute the contention as raised by the counsel for the petitioners and in acknowledgment thereof, has filed an affidavit of Inderpreet Kaur d/o late Sh. Harbhajan Singh, wherein respondent No. 2-complainant has accepted the factum of compromise which has been entered into between the parties and has also acknowledged that she has received an amount of Rs. 3,80,000/- along with the dowry articles towards full and final settlement of the dispute. She is present in the Court (as has been identified by her counsel as well as by Sh. Rajinder Singh S.I., Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur). Counsel for the State also does not have any objection to the quashing of the FIR as the matter is a matrimonial dispute and the parties have compromised the dispute. Inderpreet Kaur has also, on being asked by this Court, stated that in view of the compromise, she does not want to pursue the matter any further and has no objection, if the FIR in question, which was registered at her behest, be quashed. In view of the above position, it would not be just and equitable, as the parties have decided their ways happily and they are not able to live together, to keep the FIR in question and proceedings arising therefrom pending, which could lead to harassment to the parties. A Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, while Crl. Misc. No. M-19809 of 2009 (O&M) -3- 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 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 Crl. Misc. No. M-19809 of 2009 (O&M) -4- have amicably settled the matter, no useful purpose would be served if the proceedings are continued before the trial Court. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 201 dated 06.10.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE August 24, 2009 pj