Cr.MMO No. 149 of 2008 9.3.2009 Present: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Senior Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. for respondent No. 1. Mr. Harmeet Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. Bimal Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he withdraws the allegations levelled against respondents in the petition. He further submits that the petitioners and respondent No.2 have entered into compromise. This statement is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. The compromise entered into between the parties has been placed on record in the shape of a compromise deed (Page-16). The Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot versus State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582 has held that in disputes where the question involved is 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. The Court quashed the F.I.R. Under somewhat similar circumstances the Apex Court in Jagdish Chanana & Ors. Versus State of Haryana & Anr., AIR 2008 SC 1968 also quashed the FIR. -2- In the instant case F.I.R. No. 117/2008 was registered under Sections 382, 364, 341 and 34 IPC with police station Gagret, District Una on 26th July, 2008. The dispute which purely personal in nature has been compromised. Keeping in view the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decisions, the present petition is allowed and the F.I.R. No. 117/2008, dated 26th July, 2008, registered at police station Gagret, District Una, H.P. and all proceedings connected there with are quashed. Petition is disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 9, 2009 (PK)