IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-6246 of 2009 Date of decision : 3.7.2009 Narinder Singh @ Nikka … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab etc. …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Parveen Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Aman Deep Singh Rai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab Mr.B.S.Jaswal, Advocate for respondent No.2 Augustine George Masih , J. (Oral) The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing of FIR No.35 dated 16.3.2004 under Sections 326, 324, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mahilpur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.2, Rajive Kumar (complainant) on whose behest the FIR came into existence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that amicable settlement to the dispute which has arisen between the petitioner and the complainant, has been found resulting into a compromise, copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure P-2 dated 26.2.2009. On this basis, prayer for quashing has been made. Counsel for the respondent No.2,complainant, on the basis of the affidavit which has been filed by Rajiv Kumar (complainant) son of Mast Ram, resident of Village Mahilpur, Tehsil and District, Hoshiarpur, states that matter has amicably been settled between the parties and to resolve the issue once and for all. The existence of the compromise has been admitted by the complainant in his affidavit. Rajiv Kumar (complainant) who is present in the Court (as identified by the counsel for the complainant) states and accepts that Crl.Misc.No.M-6246 of 2009 a compromise has come into existence and he does not further want to pursue the matter. He further states that he would have no objection if FIR No.35 dated 16.3.2004 under Sections 326, 324, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mahilpur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Learned State counsel also has not disputed the factum of the compromise entered into between the parties. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. Amicable settlement between the parties cannot be said to be against the public policy and if dispute between the parties is voluntarily compromised and resolved, it would be for the betterment of the society apart from helping the parties to the compromise. A Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 can be relied upon at this stage to come to a conclusion that criminal prosecution can be quashed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. In view of compromise, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings. Taking into consideration the ratio of the ruling of Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the FIR No.35 dated 16.3.2004 under Sections 326, 324, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mahilpur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. This petition stands allowed. [ Augustine George Masih ] Judge 03.7.2009 sd 2