Crl.M.No.27121-M of 2009 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.27121-M of 2009 Date of Order: 7.10.2010 Prabhjot Singh Grewal and others .....Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. ADS Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. R.K. Chugh, Advocate for the complainant. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C is for quashing FIR No.7 dated 18.6.2009 under Sections 323/406/498-A/34 IPC, P.S. NRI, Moga. Petitioner No.1 is the husband and petitioner Nos.2 & 3 are parents-in-law of Nirmat Kaur-daughter of the complainant-Kartar Singh Bassi (respondent No.2). As per the allegations in the FIR, petitioners used to taunt and abuse besides harassing said Nirmat Kaur-daughter of the complainant on account of bringing less dowry. During the pendency of the present petition, petitioners- accused party and the complainant party have amicably resolved all their pending disputes and have drawn a compromise deed dated 5.10.2010. A photo copy of the said compromise deed dated 5.10.2010 has been furnished in the Court, which is taken on record as Mark-A. Nirmat Kaur and the complainant-Kartar Singh Bassi are Crl.M.No.27121-M of 2009 #2# present in the Court, who have been duly identified by their counsel. In terms of the compromise deed dated 5.10.2010, Nirmat Kaur has received in court four bank drafts dated 4.10.2010 bearing Nos.034145, 372251, 824420 & 824419 respectively totalling a sum of Rs.25 lacs, photo copies of the same have been retained on record as Mark-B (collectively). Complainant and said Nirmat Kaur have stated before the court that they have no objection if the present petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all consequent proceedings are quashed. Learned state counsel has handed over a copy of compromise deed dated 5.10.2010 to Head Constable-Gurtej Singh, P.S NRI Moga. He further states that in view of the parties having arrived at compromise and the complainant not willing to pursue the prosecution of the petitioners,, he is unable to raise any serious objection to the quashing of the FIR. 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 Crl.M.No.27121-M of 2009 #3# 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 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 the personal nature of the dispute between the parties, who have now Crl.M.No.27121-M of 2009 #4# desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives 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.7 dated 18.6.2009 under Sections 323/406/498-A/34 IPC, P.S. NRI, Moga and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. October 07, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE