IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-35030 of 2009 Date of decision : January 28, 2010 Saurabh Nandal and another Petitioners Versus State (Union Territory of Chandigarh) and another Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. A.D.S. Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 1 Mr. Randeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2 DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 183 dated 1.8.2009 registered at Police Station Sector 11, Chandigarh under Sections 342, 426, 506, 34 IPC on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) between the parties. Affidavit of respondent No. 2 has been filed in the Court which is placed on record. Complainant is present in the Court. Respondent No. 2 is at Hyderabad and could not come present, therefore, he has filed the affidavit. Since the matter has been compromised between the parties and the complainant who is present in the Court has also no objection with regard to quashing of FIR, I deem it appropriate that no purpose will be served if the case is tried because as per the compromise respondent No. 2 will not support the case of the prosecution and it will be a wastage of precious time of this Court. Crl. Misc. No. M-35030 of 2009 2 It has been observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney vs. Mr. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, 1980(1) SCC 63 that “the finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when the parties, despite following apart bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” Relying on the views adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Five Judges Bench of this Court also observed in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052, that compounding of offence which are not compoundable under Section 320(9) Cr.P.C. but parties entering into compromise, this Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.PC. to allow compounding of non- compoundable offences and quash the prosecution where the Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. The present one is a case covered by the views observed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the judgment mentioned above and, is therefore, a fit case to quash the FIR. In view of the above, FIR No. 183 dated 1.8.2009 registered at Police Station Sector 11, Chandigarh under Sections 342, 426, 506, 34 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arisen out of the same are quashed. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) 28.01.2010 JUDGE reena