Criminal Misc. No.M-7502 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-7502 of 2009 Date of decision: 4th May, 2009 Khushwinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. Animesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S.Teji, AAG, Punjab for respondent no. 1. Mr. Rohit Sud, Advocate for the complainant. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing of FIR No.40, dated 5.02.2004, registered under Sections 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of a compromise. Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the complainant pray that as parties have resolved their dispute by way of a written compromise, dated 9.03.2009, therefore, the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the FIR relates to the death of the complainant’s son in a vehicular accident. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Patiala, has held that the complainant’s son is also liable for negligence. It is further submitted that the complainant has received a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- with 1 Criminal Misc. No.M-7502 of 2009 interest @6% p.a. as compensation. In addition the complainant has received a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in cash. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as parties have entered into a compromise, the State does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the compromise dated 9.03.2009, Annexure-P-'2', and am of the considered opinion that the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have resolved their differences by a bonafide compromise, free from any fraud, coercion or undue influence. The Complainant-Shri Pritam Singh, son of Shri Mehtab Singh, resident of House No. 403/1, Nattan Wali Gali, Near Sheranwala Gate, Patiala, who is present in Court and has been duly identified by his counsel. He acknowledges the correctness of the above mentioned facts and of the compromise and states that he has no objection, if the FIR is quashed. A compromise or a settlement serves the immediate purpose of the parties, as it enables them to proceed with their lives without illwill or rancour and in peace and harmony. In view of the compromise, the witnesses are not likely to support the prosecution and therefore, to permit prosecution to carry on would, in my considered opinion be an exercise in futility and an unnecessary a wastage of public money and valuable Court time. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others vs. The State of Punjab reported as 2007(3) RCR(Crl.)1052 has held that, in the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court may in appropriate cases, quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non -compoundable offences. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, as the prayer for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom, does not suffer from any legal impediment, the 2 Criminal Misc. No.M-7502 of 2009 present petition is allowed and the FIR No. 40, dated 5.02.2004, registered under Sections 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed. [RAJIVE BHALLA] JUDGE 4th May, 2009 SKaushik 3