CRM-M 31494 of 2009 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M 31494 of 2009 Date of Decision: 10.11.2009 Ram Kumar ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Haryana and another ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Mr.N.S.Behgal, Advocate for the petitioner. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. ( Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short `Cr.P.C.') for quashing of FIR No.183 dated 23.5.2008 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC at Police Station Ambala Cantt and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. Notice of motion. At this stage, Sh.Sanjiv Kumar Yadav, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and has filed his power of attorney. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the parties i.e. petitioner and respondent No.2 are husband and wife but due to a family dispute, respondent No.2 had registered the present FIR. Now as good sense has prevailed upon the parties and a compromise deed (Annexure P-1) has been executed. Petitioner as well as respondent No.2 are present in Court with their respective counsel. Petitioner No.1 is identified by Sh.N.S.Behgal, Advocate whereas respondent No.2 has been identified by Sh.S.K.Yadav, Advocate. CRM-M 31494 of 2009 -2- I have asked both the petitioner as well as respondent No.2 about the compromise (Annexure P-1) to which they have stated that compromise has been effected between them and they are living happily together as husband and wife. Complainant has specifically stated that she does not want to proceed with the present FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though Section 506 IPC is compoundable but Sections 498-A/406 IPC are not compoundable. He relies upon a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 to contend that in such type of cases the Court by invoking the inherent jurisdiction, can compound the offence. After hearing the counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and especially the fact that they are husband and wife and now living happily, I find it to be a fit case for quashing of the present FIR. Thus, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.183 dated 23.5.2008 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC at P.S.Ambala Cantt. and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 10.11.2009 Judge Meenu