Crl. Misc. No.M-12348 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc.No.M-12348 of 2011 Date of Decision: 13 - 5 - 2011 Tirath Singh and others .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.B.S.Bali, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Bhullar, AAG, Punjab. Mr.Pinky Bangarh, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.31 dated 17.5.2010 registered at Police Station Meharban, District Ludhiana under Sections 452, 323, 34 IPC on the basis of compromise. Case set out by complainant- respondent No.2-Karnail Singh in the FIR is that in his village on 16.5.2010 a film was shown by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee against the abuse of drugs. At that time, accused Tirath Singh, Baldev Singh, Nazar Singh @ Bagga and Amrik Singh came and objected to that as to why movie is being shown. Crl. Misc. No.M-12348 of 2011 [2] Co-villagers made an attempt to make the accused understand and requested them not to cause any trouble. It is stated that at that time, accused gave beatings and threw brick bats. One brickbat had hit on the right hand finger of complainant Karnail Singh, Sarpanch of the village. Complainant/respondent No.2 – Karnail Singh, Sarpanch is present in Court. He has been identified by his counsel Ms.Pinky Bangarh. An affidavit on behalf of complainant-respondent No.2 has also been filed in Court. It is stated in the affidavit that since the accused are co-villagers, in order to promote amity, harmony and everlasting peace in the village, the parties have decided to bury their feud and maintain cordial relations. HC Sulakhan Singh, Police Station Meharban, who is present to assist the State counsel has also identified the complainant. Counsel for the State has further stated that the investigating agency has verified the factum of compromise, Annexure P2. He has further stated that in the present case, charge has been framed and the next date fixed before the trial Court is 21.5.2011 for prosecution evidence. Counsel for the State has raised no serious objection to quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held as under:- “28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of Crl. Misc. No.M-12348 of 2011 [3] justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation. 29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. 30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The Crl. Misc. No.M-12348 of 2011 [4] exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.” In the present case, only simple injuries were received by the complainant. The occurrence had started on a trivial issue and that too on the spur of moment without any pre-mediation. Taking into account the ratio of law laid down in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) May 13, 2011. JUDGE RC