Crl. Misc. No.M-12333 of 2011 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-12333 of 2011 Date of decision: May 19, 2011. Jatinder Singh ... Petitioner(s) v. State of Punjab & Anr. ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri Anant Kataria, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Shri J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1. Shri Gurinderjit Singh, Advocate, for the respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia , J. (Oral): Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.61 dated 19.3.2011, registered at Police Station Division No.5 Civil Lines, Ludhiana, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the petitioner and complainant – respondent No.2 in the present case. Respondent No.2 – complainant Rajpal Singh had lodged the FIR. He had made a grievance that the accused was proprietor of Sunshine Education and Immigration Services. He duped the complainant of Rs.6.00 lacs by assuring him that he will be sent to Poland. It is stated that the accused has neither kept his promise nor has he returned the amount. Crl. Misc. No.M-12333 of 2011 -: 2 :- Shri Anant Kataria, Counsel for the petitioner Jitender Singh, has stated that during the pendency of the FIR case, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and complainant Rajpal Singh has furnished affidavit Annexure P-2. Today Rajpal Singh who is present in Court, has been identified by his Counsel Shri Gurinderjit Singh. HC Jitender Kumar, P.S. Division No.5 Civil Lines, Ludhiana, who is also present in Court to assist Shri J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, has also identified Rajpal Singh. Complainant Rajpal Singh states that since the matter has been resolved amicably and he has received the remaining amount of Rs.3.00 lacs so he does not intend to pursue the present FIR. Counsel for the complainant, on his behalf, has prayed that it be quashed. In the present case, there was commercial transaction between the accused and the respondent. According to the allegations, the accused petitioner could not keep his promise to send the complainant abroad nor did he return the money. Later on, due to the intervention of the respectables, a compromise has been arrived at and an affidavit, Annexure P-2, has been given by the complainant. As admitted by the complainant, he has received the balance amount and prayed that the present FIR be quashed. No objection thereto has been raised by learned Counsel for the State. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held under 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 Crl. Misc. No.M-12333 of 2011 -: 3 :- 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. 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 Crl. Misc. No.M-12333 of 2011 -: 4 :- 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.” Taking into consideration the fact that the accused has returned the amount which he had received, and the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] May 19, 2011. Judge kadyan