Crl. Misc. No.M-23424 of 2008 & Crl. Misc. No.M-28958 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-23424 of 2008 Date of Decision: April 28, 2010 Harpinder Kaur and another ........Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and another ........Respondents And Crl. Misc. No. M-28958 of 2008 Jawahar Singh Dhillon and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ........Respondents ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Kawaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. SABINA, J. Vide this judgment Crl. Misc. No.M-23424 of 2008 and Crl. Misc. No.M-28958 of 2008 would be disposed of as both the petitions have been filed seeking quashing of same FIR No.165 dated 5.5.2008 (Annexure P-7), under Sections 406/498-A of I.P.C., Police Station Tripuri, Patiala, District- Patiala and consequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Crl. Misc. No.M-23424 of 2008 & Crl. Misc. No.M-28958 of 2008 2 Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the relatives and friends. Father of the respondent No.2 is present in person in the Court alongwith counsel for respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has executed General Power of Attorney in favour of her father Major Singh Sandhu authorizing him to pursue this case. Photocopy of the Special Power of Attorney has been placed on record (original seen and returned). Major Singh Sandhu has submitted that now with the intervention of relatives and friends parties have arrived at a compromise and he has no objection if the FIR is ordered to be quashed against all the accused. Photocopy of the compromise executed between the parties on 26.3.2010 has been placed on record (original seen and returned). Both sides have admitted the correctness of compromise. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos.26 and 24 has held as under :- Crl. Misc. No.M-23424 of 2008 & Crl. Misc. No.M-28958 of 2008 3 “26. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facts. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this Court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised? 24. On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of the Court in B.S. Joshi's case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.” Crl. Misc. No.M-23424 of 2008 & Crl. Misc. No.M-28958 of 2008 4 Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing these criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. The FIR No.165 dated 5.5.2008 (Annexure P-7), under Sections 406/498-A of I.P.C., Police Station Tripuri, District- Patiala and consequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed qua all the accused. (SABINA) April 28, 2010 JUDGE Anand