IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-21717 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: September 15, 2011 Manjit Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. J.S. Brar, Advocate, for Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ravinder Kaur Nihalsinghwala, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.2. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prays for quashing FIR No.44 dated 17.5.2011 under Section 420 IPC, registered with Police Station Mehna, District Moga, on the basis of compromise. 2. It has been pleaded that on account of money Crl. Misc. No. M-21717 of 2011 [2] transaction, the FIR came to be lodged. The disputes have been settled by way of compromise. 3. Respondent No.2-complainant, Gurmail Singh as identified by his lawyer Mr. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate, is present in Court. Affidavit sworn on 15.9.2011 by respondent No.1 has been filed in Court which is taken on record. 4. It has been specifically pleaded that the disputes have been settled by way of compromise and the complainant would have no objection if the FIR is quashed. 5. Considering the fact that disputes have been settled by way of compromise and the claim of respondent No.2 Gurmail Singh (complainant) has been settled by the petitioner, no purpose in law would be served by continuing the proceedings. This is particularly so because the respondent-complainant is not ready to bring evidence to Court so as to prosecute the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that because the parties have entered into a compromise, the petition for quashing FIR is not opposed. 7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.44 dated 17.5.2011 under Section 420 IPC, registered with Police Station Mehna, District Moga is hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) September 15, 2011 JUDGE avin Crl. Misc. No. M-21717 of 2011 [3] 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?