In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 15928 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision:March 17, 2009 Ritu and others ---Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. J.S.Dadwal,Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab Mr.Rajesh Bansal, Advocate, for respondent No. 2 *** SABINA, J. Crl. Misc. No. 11857 of 2009 Application is allowed. Compromise/Affidavit (Annexure P-3) is taken on record. Crl. Misc. No. M-15928 of 2008 Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.')for quashing of FIR No.142 dated 6.5.2008 under Sections 307 /324/ 452/506 /447/ 148/ 149 /511 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Basti Crl. Misc. No. M- 15928 of 2008(O&M) -2- Jodhewal, Ludhiana on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR in this case was lodged due to a matrimonial dispute. Now, petitioner No. 1 Ritu and Surinder Singh have got a decree of divorce. Complainant- Narinder Singh is the brother of said Surinder Singh and the other injured- Bhagat Ram is the tenant of said Surinder Singh. Now, with the intervention of relatives and friends, parties have arrived at a compromise. Respondent No. 2 is present in person along with his counsel. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has placed on record original affidavit of injured-respondent No. 2 and Bhagat Ram ( translation of the same are Annexures P-2 and P-3 respectively). A perusal of the affidavits reveal that the deponent have deposed that the FIR in question be quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder 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 paras 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 Crl. Misc. No. M- 15928 of 2008(O&M) -3- 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 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, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, in question. Crl. Misc. No. M- 15928 of 2008(O&M) -4- Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.142 dated 6.5.2008 under Sections 307 /324/ 452/506 /447/ 148/ 149 /511 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. (SABINA) JUDGE March 17, 2009 paramjit