Crl.Misc.No.M-12844 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-12844 of 2009 Date of Decision: 30 - 5 - 2009 Vinay Gulati .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ajay Kumar Gupta, Addl.A.G., Haryana. Ms.Monika Jalota, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Respondents No.1 and 2 has filed the reply. Same is taken on record. Petitioner Vinay Gulati and Virender Kumar both were posted as Teacher in Government Senior Secondary School, Kaithal. On a trivial issue, there was a fight between them. Accordingly, impugned FIR No.320 dated 22.7.2002 was registered at Police Station City Kaithal under Sections 332, 333, 353, 500 and 506 IPC. The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR, on the basis of compromise. Virender Kumar respondent No.2 is present in Court. He has Crl.Misc.No.M-12844 of 2009 [2] stated that fist blow was given to him and his tooth had dislocated. In the present case quashing has been sought on the basis of compromise. The averment made regarding compromise, has been admitted by respondent No.2 complainant who has filed reply through her counsel Ms.Monika Jalota. She has stated that since the petitioner and respondent are colleagues and teacher working in the same district, therefore, due to intervention of teachers and respectables, a compromise has been arrived between them. Virender Kumar respondent No.2 is present in Court and state that matter has been compromised. Ms.Monika Jalota on instructions from complainant-respondent No.2 has stated that complainant-respondent No.2 does not want to pursue the FIR and same be quashed as the parties have decided to promote everlasting peace, cordial relations and harmony. It has been held in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 that where a compromise has been effected between the parties, continuation of criminal proceedings will serve no useful purpose. Therefore, the impugned FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed. Petition is disposed off. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) May 30, 2009. JUDGE RC