IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-18851 of 2009 Date of decision : October 12, 2009 Sudarshan Kumar Duggal ....Petitioner versus M/s Amritsar Pulp and Board Mills (Pvt) Ltd and another ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Animesh Sharma, Advocate for Mr. PS Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Naveen Mahajan, Advocate for respondent no. 1 Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab for respondent no. 2 L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Affidavit of respondent no. 1 filed today in Court is taken on record along with annexed copy of compromise. Sudarshan Kumar Duggal has filed this petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, Cr.P.C.) for quashing of criminal complaint dated 7.11.2008, Annexure P/1 filed by respondent no. 1 against petitioner and others under sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC and for quashing of summoning order dated 17.2.2009, Annexure P/2 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. In affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 complainant it has been affirmed that compromise dated 1.10.2009 has been effected by Criminal Misc. No. M-18851 of 2009 -2- respondent no. 1 with the petitioner. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 states that in view of compromise, respondent no. 1 has no objection to the quashing of the impugned complaint and consequential proceedings. In appropriate cases, criminal prosecution 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 was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh vs State of Punjab, 2007 (3) Law Herald (Punjab & Haryana) 2225. In the instant case, compromise has been effected between petitioner and respondent no. 1- complainant. Grievance of the complainant-respondent no. 1 has since been satisfied. An amount of Rs 20 lacs has been paid to the petitioner's company by complainant-respondent no. 1 and it is accordingly a fit case in which the impugned complaint should be quashed. In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned complaint dated 7.11.2008, Annexure P/1 is quashed along with summoning order dated 17.2.2009, Annexure P/2 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom as against the petitioner. ( L.N. Mittal ) October 12, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'