IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.M-25230 of 2010 Date of Decision:14.3.2011 Jangir Singh and others .... Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and another .... Respondents And Crl. M. No.M-25234 of 2010 Date of Decision:14.3.2011 Chinder Pal Singh and others .... Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and another .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate. Mrs. Neelam, A.A.G. Punjab. Mr. Aseem Kataria, Advocate. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. The instant petitions have been filed for quashing of FIR No.130 dated 29.6.2010 registered under Sections 323/324/326/148/149 IPC Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Ferozepur as well as cross version under Sections 323/324/326/148/149/34 IPC given in the aforesaid FIR and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. The FIR in question mentioned in Crl. M No.25230-M of 2010 was got registered by respondent No.2-Kashmir Singh whereas cross case mentioned in Crl. M. No.25234-M of 2010 was got registered by respondent No.2-Jangir Singh. However, the matter has since been compromised. Crl. M. No.M-25230 of 2010 -2- Vide orders dated 27.10.2010, the parties were directed to appear before Illaqa Magistrate on 9.11.2010. The said Court was further directed to record a finding whether any volunteer compromise has been arrived at between the parties in the FIR and the cross version and submit a report to this Court in this regard. In pursuance to the same, reports of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fazilka, have been received in both the petitions. As per the said reports, the statements of the parties have been recorded. It is further submitted that as per their statements, the parties appear to have genuinely arrived at a compromise to bury the hatchet and to maintain brotherhood, peace and harmony amongst themselves and the compromise so arrived at apparently does not appear to be result of any pressure, coercion or having been arrived at for any extraneous reason. Thus, there is no doubt that the matter has been compromised. 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 held that 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 reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under:- “ The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non- compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.” 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 Crl. M. No.M-25230 of 2010 -3- 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.” In view of the settled position of law and in the facts of the present case, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to accept the compromise and exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice to promote peace and harmony. The compromise is entered into without any pressure. The parties are co-villagers. Accordingly, the instant petitions are allowed and FIR No.130 dated 29.6.2010 registered under Sections 323/324/326/148/149 IPC Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Ferozepur as well as cross version under Sections 323/324/326/148/149/34 IPC given in the aforesaid FIR and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties are hereby quashed in the interest of justice. A photo copy of this order be placed on the connected case. 14.3.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE