Crl.Misc. M No.14880 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. M No. 14880 of 2009 Date of Decision:May 30, 2009 Sukchain Singh and others ...........Petitioners Versus Sukhwinder Kaur ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.P.K.Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Manpreet Singh Longia, Advocate for the respondent ** Sabina, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of complaint (Annexure P1), summoning order (Annexure P2) and resultant proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala on the basis of compromise . Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that now parties with the intervention of respectables have arrived at a compromise. Respondents No.2, who is present in person along with her counsel, has admitted the contents of the compromise (Annexure P3), and has stated that she has no objection, if the complaint in question is quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Crl.Misc. M No.14880 of 2009 2 Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos. 23 and 24 has held as under:- “23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised? 24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S.Joshi's case (supra) and the compromise Crl.Misc. M No.14880 of 2009 3 arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.” Since the parties have arrived at a compromise, in order to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Complaint under Section 406/498-A/500 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar Patiala PP Sanaur (Annexure P1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom,are quashed . ( Sabina ) Judge May 30, 2009 arya