Crl. Misc. No. M- 937 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 937 of 2010 Date of Decision: March 16, 2010 Madan Lal and others ........Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & Another ........Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Y.P. Malik, DAG, Haryana. Ms. Kusumanjali Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') for quashing the FIR No.123 dated 23.03.2003 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323/324/34 of IPC (subsequently added Section 326 of IPC) and cross version dated 23.3.2003 under Section 323/324/34 IPC, Police Station Sadar Bhiwani, District- Bhiwani (Annexure P-2) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it is a case of version and cross version. Now the parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the relatives and friends. Petitioners as well as respondents no.3 and 4, who are present in person in the Court along with their Counsel, have admitted the factum of the compromise between the parties and the contents of their affidavits Crl. Misc. No. M- 937 of 2010 2 available on the file. Respondent No.2 Sajjan Kumar @ Sajjan Singh had appeared on the last date along with his counsel and had admitted the contents of the compromise and his affidavit and had submitted that he had no objection if the FIR in question as well as the cross version are ordered to be quashed. Petitioners no.2 to 4 are present in person in the Court. Petitioner No.1 was also present on the last date and had submitted that he had no objection if the FIR in question as well as the cross version are ordered to be quashed. 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.23 and 24 has held as under :- “23. 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 Crl. Misc. No. M- 937 of 2010 3 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.” 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, the present petition is allowed. the FIR No.123 dated 23.03.2003 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323/324/34 of IPC (subsequently added Section 326 of IPC) and cross version dated 23.3.2003 under Section 323/324/34 IPC, Police Station Sadar Bhiwani, District- Bhiwani (Annexure P-2) and subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed. (SABINA) March 16, 2010 JUDGE Anand