Crl. Misc. No.M-32384 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-32384 of 2009 Date of Decision: 13.01.2010 Shahbaj Singh ....Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab etc. ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Satbir Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G., Punjab Mr. Gurmeet S. Saini, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR No.166 dated 29.03.2006 under Sections 308, 323, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathinda and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. The FIR was registered against the present petitioner by respondent No.2-Sandeep Kumar son of Sh. Surinder Kumar, alleging therein that the petitioner has caused injuries to the complainant. Due to the intervention of the respectable persons of the area, the compromise has been effected between the parties. They are now living peacefully. Crl. Misc. No.M-32384 of 2009 2 There is no grudge between them. As per the compromise, the complainant respondent No.2-Sandeep Kumar does not wish to pursue the above mentioned FIR against the petitioner. Separate statements of respondent No.2-Sandeep Kumar and injured Gurdeep Singh have also been recorded. It is duly stated by them that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection, if the said FIR is quashed. In fact, on the basis of the compromise, even the cancellation report was submitted. The matter having been compromised, it is fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of the FIR. The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that 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 not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under :- “ 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.” In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under :- Crl. Misc. No.M-32384 of 2009 3 “ We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” It is apparent from the allegations in the FIR that the matter is between the students. The matter has since been compromised without any pressure. The compromise is placed on record as P-2. In view of the facts of the present case and taking into account that the petitioner and parties herein are young students and also taking into account the settled position of law, the Court deems it proper to accept the compromise in the interest of justice and the FIR is quashed in order to promote peace, harmony as well as to allow the parties to now move on in life. The matter having been compromised, the continuation of the litigation would be a futile exercise. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.166 dated 29.03.2006 under Sections 308, 323, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathind and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed in the interest of justice. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 13.01.2010 JUDGE gurpreet