Crl. Misc. No.M-5737 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-5737 of 2011 Date of Decision: 23.02.2011 Chander Shekher and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioners. ***** 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 directing the appellate court to compound the offence in the appeal on the basis of compromise pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar. It is contended that the matter has been compromised. The compromise deed (Annexure P-2) has been placed on record. It is further stated that after investigation, charges were framed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. Ultimately, vide order dated 25/27.11.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar, all the three accused- petitioners were convicted under Sections 120-B, 420, 467 and 468 IPC. Against that judgment, the appeal is pending before the Sessions Judge, Hisar. The Apex Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910 while quashing the FIR and all proceedings arising out of the same held Crl. Misc. No.M-5737 of 2011 2 that the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. In that case also the petitioners were convicted under Section 498-A IPC and were sentenced to imprisonment of 18 months. An appeal was filed against the conviction order and during the pendency of the appeal, the parties had settled their differences. However, they filed petition before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complaint as well as conviction order on account of the compromise. The High Court dismissed the same. Aggrieved, they challenged the same before the Apex Court. The Apex Court accepted the compromise and quashed the FIR and all the proceedings arising out of the same, as well as order of conviction. This Court in the case of Sukhwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2008(3) RCR (Criminal) 991 who relying upon the judgment of Khursheed and another v. State of U.P. and another, 2007(4) RCR (Criminal) 495 allowed the petitioners to compound the offence under Section 452 IPC during the pendency of the appeal. 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 Crl. Misc. No.M-5737 of 2011 3 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 view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Court to record the statement of the parties and thereafter, in case, the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that the compromise is genuine, it shall be at liberty to compound the said offence in view of the well settled proposition of law. Allowed as above. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 23.02.2011 JUDGE gurpreet