Crl. Misc.No.M 19445 of 2010 # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAT AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M 19445 of 2010 Date of Decision:-25.08.2010 Jarnail Singh & Anr. ......Petitioners. Versus State of Punjab & Ors. ......Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab. Mr. Yatharth Hans, Advocate for Respondent no.2. *** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Present petition under section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of FIR No.65 dated 28.4.2003 under Section 452, 323, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code registered with police Station Sadar Mallanwala, District Ferozepur and all the the subsequent proceedings arising out therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties. The dispute is between the shopkeepers in the same area Crl. Misc.No.M 19445 of 2010 # 2# over a issue of use of “platform-Thara”. The allegations are that the petitioner-accused entered the shop of the complainant and gave him beatings over use of 'Thara'. It is not in dispute that the petitioner-accused stands convicted vide order dated 10.11.2009 passed by the learned JMIC, Zira and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 452 IPC and a fine of Rs.200/- and in default simple imprisonment for seven days; and also rigorous imprisonment for six months under section 506 of Indian Penal Code. It is also not in dispute that the appeal filed against the conviction is pending hearing before the learned Appellate Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that there is no bar for this court to set aside the conviction and quash the FIR in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC. He further submits that in view of trivial nature of the accused and the compromise effected between the parties the prayer deserves to be accepted. Learned State counsel on the other hand placed reliance on judgment of Ishwar Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2009(1) RCR (Criminal) 1 and submits that after the conviction for an offence which is not compoundable, the courts on the basis of compromise can only interfere on the question of quantum of sentence and as such prays for dismissal of the present petition. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion it would not be appropriate to exercise the jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 Cr.PC as it is the appellate court who is seized of the Crl. Misc.No.M 19445 of 2010 # 3# matter at this moment of time. Therefore, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise all such pleas before the learned appellate court. Disposed of as infructuous. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 25th August, 2010 Vinay.