Crl.M.No.3110-M of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.3110-M of 2010 Date of order: 30.9.2010 Gurdev Singh and others ....Petitioners vs. State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate for the complainant. JASWANT SINGH, J Present petition under section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of FIR No.102 dated 6.9.2009 under Sections 380/448/454 IPC, P.S Sadar Moga and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromise dated 22.1.2010 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No.2-complainant. As per allegations in the FIR, petitioners by taking benefit of forged papers had illegally gotten possession of the property of the complainant with intention to grab the same. Vide order dated 4.8.2010 passed by this Court, learned trial Court was directed to record the statements of the parties concerned and submit report in pursuance of which, a report/letter dated 22.9.2010 has been received from JMIC, Moga, which is taken on record as Mark-A. It is stated in the said report that the statements Crl.M.No.3110-M of 2010 #2# of the parties have been recorded whereby they have arrived at a compromise and that the complainant has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise. Learned state counsel is unable to raise any serious objection to the quashing of the FIR on the basis of the compromise since the complainant is not willing to support the prosecution case. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non-compoundable offences. The relevant extracts read as under:- “The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C., which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.” Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) SCC 582, the relevant extract of which is as under:- “We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question Crl.M.No.3110-M of 2010 #3# 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 utilised 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.” Keeping in view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.102 dated 6.9.2009 under Sections 380/448/454 IPC, P.S Sadar Moga and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. September 30, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE