Crl. Misc. No. M-11076 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-11076 of 2008 Date of Decision : July 27, 2009 Lakhwinder Kaur and others .... Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Advocate for Mr. B. S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab for respondent no.1. Mr. Amit Mehta, Advocate for Mr. Tarunvir Vashisht, Advocate for respondent no.2. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Lakhwinder Kaur and six others have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr. P. C.) for quashing of FIR No.85 dated 23.06.2007, under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short – IPC), registered at Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Crl. Misc. No. M-11076 of 2008 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the parties have since effected compromise. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes that compromise has been effected between the parties and therefore, respondent no.2 has no objection to the quashing of the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that on the basis of compromise, the same FIR has already been quashed qua petitioners' co-accused Satnam Singh, who is husband of complainant- respondent no.2, vide order dated 21.04.2009 passed in Crl. Misc. No. M- 6176 of 2009. In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It is more so in cases arising out of matrimonial dispute. It has been so held by a Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2007 (3) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana) 2225. In the instant case, matrimonial dispute between complainant- respondent no.2 and her husband has since been settled. Necessary amount has been paid to respondent no.2, and respondent no.2 and her husband have agreed to obtain divorce by mutual consent, as noticed in order dated 21.04.2009 referred to herein above. It is, therefore, a fit case in which FIR should be quashed. In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR No.85 dated 23.06.2007, under Sections 406, 498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur is quashed, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. July 27, 2009 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE Crl. Misc. No. M-11076 of 2008 3