CRM No. M 21432 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 21432 of 2010 Date of decision: 09.12.2010 Suneet Puri and others ........Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr.Vinay Kataria, Advocate for for the petitioners Ms Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana for the respondent - State Mr. Anant Kataria, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 21 dated 11.03.2010 under Section 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sector 19, Panchkula which was got registered by respondent No. 4 - complainant against the present petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2010 arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. CRM No. M 21432 of 2010 2 Today, complainant is present in court along with her counsel. She filed her affidavit, stating therein, that she has settled all the differences. In para 5 of the affidavit, she stated that she and her husband has already filed a divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in which, their statements were recorded and the next date of hearing is 13.12.2010 for the final statement of both the parties. It is also stated in her affidavit that as agreed, Rs.5,00,000/- has already been received by her towards her permanent alimony and Rs.5,00,000/- will be given by her husband at the time of allowing of divorce petition. However, today a bank draft bearing No.041241 dated 27.11.2010, for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- drawn on State Bank of Patiala, Jalandhar has been handed over to respondent No. 4. She has also stated that the compromise has been made without any pressure, coercion or undue influence from any side and she has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. In the present case, the matrimonial discord led to filing of the present FIR. Now, the matter has been amicably resolved. 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 matters CRM No. M 21432 of 2010 3 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.” The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:- “6. We need to emphasize 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.” The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The complainant has no objection if the said FIR is quashed. Taking into account the allegations, compromise and affidavit of the complainant, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in the above settled proposition of law. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 21 dated 11.03.2010 under Section 406, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sector 19, Panchkula and further proceedings arising out of the CRM No. M 21432 of 2010 4 same are hereby quashed. Allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 09.12.2010 mohan