In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM.M-15419 of 2009 Decided on Oct 26,2009. Palwinder Singh -- Petitioner vs. The State of Punjab and another --Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.R.KShukla,Advocate,for the petitioner Mr.R.S.Rawat,AAG,Punjab. Mr.G.P.Vashishat,Advocate,for the complainant/respondent No.2. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), for quashing of FIR No. 181 dated 08.12.2007,registered under Sections 324,323,34 IPC at Police Station, Khamano in view of the compromise between the parties. Notice of motion was issued on 30.5.2009. Mr.G.P.Vashishat,Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2. Both petitioner (Palwinder Singh) and respondent No.2.(Gurjant Singh) are present in Court today. The petitioner has been identified by his counsel Mr.R.K.Shukla, whereas respondent No.2 (Gurjant Singh) has been identified byhis counsel CRM.M-15419 of 2009 -2- Mr. G.P.Vashishat. I have asked both the petitioner and respondent No.2 present in Court about the compromise (Annexure P-2). They have stated that the compromise has been executed between them and there is no change in it till today. Section 320 Cr.P.C provides for compounding of the offence by the person against whom the offence has been committed with intervention of the Court and also without the intervention of the Court. Section 323 Cr.PC. falls in Section 320 (1) Cr.P.C, therefore, it can be compounded by respondent No.2, whereas Section 324 IPC does not find mention in Section 320 Cr.PC.. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 1052, in which this Court has held that even non-compoundable offence can also be compounded. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that compromise has already been effected between the parties vide Annexure P-2 and also the fact that respondent No.3 Gurjant Singh has also filed an affidavit dated 22.9.2009 admitting the compromise, the present petition is allowed and the aforesaid FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising there- from are hereby quashed. Oct 26 ,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge