CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.05.2011 Sukhwant Singh and others ........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Sunil Chadha, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. J S Brar, AAG, Punjab for the respondent State Ms Pooja Chopra, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. CRM 23662 of 2009 This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C for impleading applicant Jasbir Singh son of Ranjit Singh son of Rattan Singh, resident of Khanpur, Tehsil and District Ludhiana as respondent No. 2-complainant after the demise of Sampuran Singh on 11.11.2007. C.M is allowed with all just exceptions and applicant Jasbir Singh is permitted to be impleaded as complainant/respondent No. 2 only CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) 2 for the purpose of present petition. Main case In pursuance to the order dated 04.05.2011, today learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has placed on record the compromise deed dated 02.02.2011 to show that the matter has been compromised between the parties. To the same effect, affidavit of Jasbir Singh who is impleaded as complainant in place of Sampuran Singh has also been filed. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No. 138 dated 06.07.2007 under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same. In the present case, one Sampuran Singh son of Gopal Singh owned and possessed agricultural land at Sahnewal and he executed number of Sale Deeds, Exchange Deeds, General Power of Attorney and Wills in respect of his property. Thereafter, the said Sampuran Singh started raising dispute qua some of executions after having conspired with his family members. Civil suit was also filed. Ultimately, the suit was dismissed. Thereafter, the said Sampuran Singh filed CRM M 33746 of 2007 before this Court. While disposing of the said petition, this Court passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to withdraw CRM M 33746 of 2007 with a direction to Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana to decide representation (Annexure P14) to this petition, submitted to the additional Director General of Police which has been marked to him, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) 3 At last, on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, the present FIR was registered on the basis of P14. However, during the pendency of petition, Sampuran Singh died but he executed a registered will in favour of applicant Jasbir Singh with regard to his estate. The said Jasbir Singh has been ordered to be impleaded as complainant/respondent No. 2 in place of Sampuran Singh (since expired). As per Jasbir Singh, the the matter has been compromised vide compromise deed dated 02.02.2011. Compromise deed has also been placed on record. As per the compromise deed, the entire land measuring 30K-5M shall be sold within a period of six months and the sale proceeds so received on the sale of the property shall be shared by the parties of first part to the extent of 45% and by the parties of the second part to the extent of 55%. Both the parties shall withdraw their respective suits pending in various Courts. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the civil suits have also been disposed off in terms of the above compromise. From the above, it is clear that the matter has now been amicably settled between the parties. As such, the present FIR deserves to be quashed. 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 CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) 4 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 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 emphasized 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 utilized 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 said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. Taking into account the allegations, compromise as well as affidavit of the complainant, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 138 CRM No. M 45406 of 2007 (O&M) 5 dated 06.07.2007 under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 12.05.2011 mohan