IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1)Crl. Misc. No. M-15989 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.08.2011 1)Joga Singh & Anr. ..Petitioners Versus U.T. Chandigarh & Anr. ..Respondents 2)Crl. Misc. No. M-21022 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.08.2011 Ujjagar Singh & Anr. ..Petitioners Versus U.T. Chandigarh & Anr. ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA. Present: Mr. S.S. Bhinder, Advocate for Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Prit Pal, Advocate for UT, Chandigarh. Mr. Balkaran Singh, Advocate for Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** SABINA, J. Vide this order the abovementioned two petitions i.e. CRM No. M-15989 of 2009 and CRM No. M-21022 of 2010 would be disposed of as they are arise out of the same FIR. Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No. 10 dated 19.01.2009, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sector 19, UT, Chandigarh and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No. 2 have submitted that now with the intervention of the relatives and Crl. Misc. No. M-15989 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Crl. Misc. No. M-21022 of 2010 (O&M) respectables of the locality parties have arrived at compromise. Vide order dated 13.12.2010 this Court directed the trial Court to record the statements of the parties and report genuineness of the compromise. In terms of the said order the trial Court after recording the statements of the parties has reported that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine and the parties have arrived at compromise without any pressure and fear. 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 Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by Crl. Misc. No. M-15989 of 2009 (O&M) -3- Crl. Misc. No. M-21022 of 2010 (O&M) 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 and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed. The FIR No. 10 dated 19.01.2009, (Annexure P-1) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 19, UT, Crl. Misc. No. M-15989 of 2009 (O&M) -4- Crl. Misc. No. M-21022 of 2010 (O&M) Chandigarh and all the subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed. (SABINA) 01.08.2011 JUDGE Poonam (II)