IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-18136 of 2008 Date of Decision: August 12, 2008 Mukhtiar Singh & Others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS The State of Punjab & Another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. H.K. Verma, Advocate, for Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Kamaldeep Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. N.K. Manchanda, Advocate, for respondent No.2. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) The petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.20 dated 1.3.2007, lodged for commission of offences under Sections 452, 324, 34 IPC with Police Station, Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners as also respondent No.2, Balwant Singh (complainant) is that the petitioners and the complainant are residents of the same village. On Crl. Misc. No. M-18136 of 2008 [2] account of continuance of proceedings, the atmosphere in the entire village is being vitiated. In view of the intervention of the respectable and elders, the parties have settled their disputes and have entered into compromise. Balwant Singh, complainant is present in Court as identified by Mr. N.K. Manchanda, Advocate. The complainant has endorsed the factum of compromise and the filing of affidavit, Annexure P-2 sworn on 19.7.2008. I have also taken note of the fact that it was only Balwant Singh who had received injuries. This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench), Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, the following has been held in para 28 to 30:- 28. 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 re- duces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a mat- rimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commer- cial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litiga- tion. 29. 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 Crl. Misc. No. M-18136 of 2008 [3] 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. 30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaus- tive list nor the defined para meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and cau- tion. The exercise of power has to be with circum- spection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of para- mount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two war- ring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should en- deavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.” Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in particular the statement given by respondent No.2, complainant, this petition is allowed. FIR No.20 dated 1.3.2007, lodged for commission of offences under Sections 452, 324, 34 IPC with Police Station, Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga, is hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) August 12, 2008 JUDGE avin