Criminal Misc. No. M-27232 of 2011(O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-27232 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: October 31, 2011 Bhupinder Singh and others ... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr.Raman Mohinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Sudhir Nehra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent – State. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short `CrPC'), seeking quashing of First Information Report (for short `FIR') No.66 dated June 28th, 2011 (Annexure P1), under Sections 148, 186, 353 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC') registered in Police Station Ghagga, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala. 2. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Assistant Sub Inspector Jaswinder Singh stating that on March 28th, 2011 he reached village Rattanheri in connection with an enquiry on the application made by Gurcharan Singh, etc. - (petitioners No.6 to 11). They alleged that their crops were damaged by Bhupinder Singh, etc. - (petitioners No.1 to 5). Both the parties were present at the spot with shovels and sticks. Despite a direction by the complainant to drop their sticks, they started giving blows to each other. The police personnel were also man-handled and their dresses torn. 3. The quashing of the FIR is sought on the basis of Criminal Misc. No. M-27232 of 2011(O&M) [2] compromise (Annexure P2) arrived at between the petitioners, that is, the parties, which assaulted the police personnel from discharging their official duties. They were obstructed from discharging their public functions. 4. The legislature had in its wisdom identified the various offences in which it thought that a resolution of the dispute would be in the interest of the society. The provisions of Section 320 CrPC deals with “compounding of offences”. It provides two tables, one containing description of offences which can be compounded by the person mentioned in it and the other containing description of offences which can be compounded with the permission of the Court by the persons indicated therein. Only such offences as are included in the said two Tables can be compounded and none else. Sub- section (9) of Section 320 of the Code imposes a ban in the following terms: “(9) No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this Section.” 5. The offences for which the petitioners are facing trial are non-compoundable. There is no scope for a Court of law permitting the compounding of such offence. It is not a case where the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised as the quashing of FIR will not prevent the abuse of process of any Court, rather it will be abuse of the provision of Section 482 CrPC itself. It is well settled principle of law “that you shall not make a trade of a felony.” 6. In view of above, there is no reason to quash the FIR on the basis of compromise. The petition is dismissed. October 31, 2011 ( NAWAB SINGH ) `gian' JUDGE