IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc.20221-M of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 CHARANJIT SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. HS Brar, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks quashing of FIR No.122 dated 21.12.2004 under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sarai Amanat Khan, District Amritsar, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-1). The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there were matrimonial disputes which, however, have been settled. Respondent No.2-complainant/Surjit Kaur alias Manpreet Kaur is now residing with the petitioner. The petitioner has already withdrawn the petition filed by him seeking divorce. The compromise deed has been placed on record as Annexure P-1. The recital in the compromise deed indicates that respondent No.2 would withdraw the FIR, which is at issue in this petition, as also the application under Section 125, Code of Criminal Criminal Misc.20221-M of 2008 2 Procedure. Learned counsel for the respondent-State, on instructions from ASI Talwinder Singh, has endorsed the fact that the parties, indeed, have entered into compromise and are, now, living together. This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench). The following has been held in paras 28 to 30:- “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 so- cial 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 ab- sence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventuali- ties 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 af- fect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Fur- ther, 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. Criminal Misc.20221-M of 2008 3 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 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.” Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the continuance of further proceedings shall interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioner and respondent No.2. The factum of compromise has already been verified by the respondent-State. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.122 dated 21.12.2004 under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sarai Amanat Khan, District Amritsar, and subsequent proceedings are quashed. September 16, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE