Crl. M. No. M-34159 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl. M. No. M-34159 of 2009 Date of Decision:20.07.2010 Rupinder Singh alias Pinder .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr.Bikramjit Singh Randhawa, Advocate for Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Mr. Jasjeet Singh, Advocate for the private respondents -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No. 89 dated 03.06.2003 under Sections 304-A, 279, 337, 427 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. Copy of the compromise deed dated 16.11.2009 is also placed on record as Annexure P-2. The legal heirs of the deceased, namely, Manjit Kaur wife of Crl. M. No. M-34159 of 2009 2 Joginder Singh, Navdip Kaur and Simranjit Kaur minor daughters of late Kuldip Singh through their mother Harpreet Kaur were impleaded as parties respondents No. 4 to 6. The said Harpreet Kaur has also filed her affidavit. Vide order dated 04.05.2010 passed by this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court on 24.05.2010. Further, the trial Court was also directed to record their statements and send its report with regard to the genuineness of the said compromise. In pursuance to the aforesaid order, the parties appeared before the trial Court and got their statements recorded. The trial Court vide its letter dated 17.06.2010, copy of which is placed on record, informed the Court that the complainant compromised the matter with the accused petitioner without any pressure or coercion and that the compromise between the parties appears to be genuine and valid. The accused in this case was driving a Tractor. He accidentally hit into the Scooter being driver by the deceased. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another-2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:- “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 reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord- tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such Crl. M. No. M-34159 of 2009 3 matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.” In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008 (4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised 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.” Taking into account the allegations made in the FIR, the statements made by the parties before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, the report dated 17.06.2010 submitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, endorsing the genuineness of the compromise, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and FIR No. 89 dated 03.06.2003 under Sections 304-A, 279, 337, 427 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis Crl. M. No. M-34159 of 2009 4 of compromise entered into between the parties are hereby quashed in the interest of justice. 20.07.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) mohan JUDGE