CRM No. M 2386 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 2386 of 2010 Date of decision: 29.03.2010 Onkar Singh and others ........ petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Kuldip Sanwal, Advocate for for the petitioners Mr. J S Sandhu, AAG, Punjab for the respondent - State Ms Seema Arora, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.151 dated 22.09.2009 under sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 34 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) which was got registered by respondent No. 2 - complainant against the present petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 22.01.2010 having been arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as CRM No. M 2386 of 2010 2 Annexure P-2. Original compromise has also been placed on record vide CRM No. 12409 of 2010. A separate statement of the complainant to the same effect has also been got recorded in the Court. Complainant Sukhwinder Kaur has also filed her reply in the form of affidavit stating therein that she has no objection if the F.I.R is quashed. The same is taken on record. The parties are from the same brotherhood and from the same village. With the intervention of the respectable and relatives, the matter has been compromised between them. The parties are living together peacefully in harmony and are on visiting terms. As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioners have sold the land of the share of the children of the complainant and caused her financial loss. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “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 reduced 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 exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to CRM No. M 2386 of 2010 3 prescribe the exercise of such power.” The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize 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.” The present dispute is purely personal in nature and the compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The parties are relatives of each other. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. Taking into account the allegations, affidavit as well as the statement of the complainant and the matter being totally personal in nature, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same. Keeping in mind the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh as well as the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) as also the facts of the present case, the compromise deserves to be accepted. Thus, it would CRM No. M 2386 of 2010 4 be in the interest of justice to quash FIR No.151 dated 22.09.2009 under sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 34 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) as well as further proceedings arising out of the same for keeping peace, harmony as well as to reduce friction in the society. Accordingly, the aforesaid FIR and further proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 29.03.2010 mohan