CRM No.M 18025 of 2010 # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAT AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M 18025 of 2010 Date of Decision:-23.08.2010 Naresh Kumar etc. ......Petitioners. Versus State of Haryana etc. ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Sukant Gupta, Advocate for Respondents No.2. *** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Present petition under section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of FIR No.267 dated 27.4.2010 under sections 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station City Yamunanagar, District Yamunanagar qua the petitioners and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise 10.6.2010 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the accused/petitioners and the complainant. CRM No.M 18025 of 2010 # 2# In the FIR complainant Subash Chander who is a goldsmith had made allegations against the accused/petitioners that they have taken gold and diamond jewellery items on the pretext of supplying the same to the further customers but they did not pay back the money of the above said items to the complainant. Upon notice of motion respondent no.2-complainant caused appearance through his Advocate on the last date of hearing. Both the parties had stated that parties have compromised the matter and made request for quashing of FIR. In view of the same parties were directed to appear before the learned CJM, Yamuna Nagar with direction to the CJM to record the statements of the parties regarding the genuineness of the compromise and send a report in that regard. Report dated 5.8.2010 of learned CJM, Jagadhari has been received duly accompanied by photocopies of statements of accused as well as complainant recorded before that court wherein the complainant has stated that he has amicably settled the matter with Petitioners Naresh Kumar & Ravinder Kumar and has no objection if the aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings are quashed against them. It was further stated by him that he had not compromised the matter with accused Ravi Sharma son of Vinod Sharma and wants to continue with the proceedings against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon judgment of this court in case titled as Parambir Singh Gill Vs. Malkiat Kaur 2010(1) RCR(Criminal) 256 stated that proceedings qua the CRM No.M 18025 of 2010 # 3# present accused only may be quashed by the court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.PC and thereby permit continuance of proceedings against rest of the accused. A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non- compoundable offences. The relevant extracts read as under:- “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.” Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) SCC 582, the relevant extract of which is as under:- “We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common CRM No.M 18025 of 2010 # 4# sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” Keeping In view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that it is a fit case where there is no legal impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.267 dated 27.4.2010 under sections 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station City Yamunanagar, District Yamunanagar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua petitioners Naresh Kumar and Ravinder Kumar only, however, proceedings qua Ravi Sharma shall continue. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 23rd August, 2010 Vinay.