Criminal Misc. No. 21929-M of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-21929 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:April 26, 2010 Gurtej Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Vivek Goel, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai,Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1 Ms.Veerpal Kaur, Advocate for Mr.H.S.Rakhra,Advocate for respondent No.2 Mr.Manuj Nagrath,Advocate for respondent No.3 ** Sabina, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 121 dated 28.10.2001 under Sections 363/366 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Jaitu District Faridkot (Annexure P1) and order dated 25.8.2003 and subsequent proceedings thereto. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had performed marriage with respondent No.3-Rekha Rani. They Criminal Misc. No. 21929-M of 2009 2 have been blessed with a child. Now, with the intervention of relatives and friends, a compromise has been effected between the petitioner and the complainant. Complainant-respondent No.2, is present in person along with her counsel and has tendered her affidavit, as per which, she has no objection if the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed. She has further submitted that her daughter-respondent No.3 has performed marriage with petitioner and they are residing happily. Respondent No.3 is present in person along with her counsel and has admitted the contents of her affidavit (Annexure P4), as per which, she has performed marriage with petitioner as per her own wish. 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 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 Criminal Misc. No. 21929-M of 2009 3 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 in order to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 121 dated 28.10.2001 under Sections 363/366 IPC registered at Police Station Jaitu District Faridkot (Annexure P1) as well as the subsequent Criminal Misc. No. 21929-M of 2009 4 proceedings arising therefrom,are quashed . ( Sabina ) Judge April 26, 2010 arya