Crl. Misc No. M-15572 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc No. M-15572 of 2009 Date of decision : 27.11.2009 Sohan Lal and others ....Petitioners V/s State of U.T. Chandigarh and another ....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Vishal Garg, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate for the U.T. Chandigarh-petitioner No. 1. Mr. Kunal Mulwani, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 593 dated 04.12.2007 registered under Sections 323/506/34 IPC at Police Station Sector -17, Chandigarh and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. On request of counsel for the parties, the matter was placed before the Permanent Lok Adalat, where the parties have arrived at a compromise and statement of the complainant was recorded to this effect. The order dated 05.11.2009 passed by the Lok Adalat reads thus: “ Respondent No. 2 – complainant has compromise with the other parties and has made a statement that he does not want any further action to be taken on the FIR No. 593 dated 04.12.2007 lodged by him under Section 323, 506, 34 IPC and Crl. Misc No. M-15572 of 2009 2 have no objection if the FIR aforesaid is quashed. He orally states that U.T. Has also issued notification that offence under Section 506 IPC is not compoundable, hence, the case is returned to the High Court for passing appropriate order.” Complainant/respondent No. 2 is present in court. He is duly identified by his counsel. He has affirmed the statement made by him before the Lok Adalat. Affidavit (Annexure P-3) filed on his behalf is already on the record, wherein also the factum of compromise is admitted. Mr. Bassi, learned counsel for the U.T. Chandigarh submits that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, the State would not stand in the way of quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. The compromise is in the interest of the parties and after the matter has been resolved by an amicable settlement, no useful purpose is likely to be served with continuance of the criminal proceedings. In view of the above, the present FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed in the light of the decision of Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR(Crl.), 1052. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed. The FIR in question and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. 27.11.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE