IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-34483 of 2009 Date of decision : January 27, 2010 Sushila Devi and others Petitioners Versus State of U.T. and another Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. Gurdev Singh, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Ravindra Jain, Advocate for respondent No. 2 DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 483 dated 25.9.2007 registered at Police Station Sector-17, Chandigarh under Sections 452, 506, 34 on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) dated 1.12.2009 between the parties. Notice of motion was issued on 9.12.2009. Both the parties are present in the Court except Sushila Devi who is stated to be more than 76 years of age and was not in a position to come present in the Court. The petitioners and respondent No. 2 have been identified by their respective counsel. Since the matter has been compromised between the parties and the complainant, who is present in the Court has also no objection with quashing of FIR registered on the basis of compromise, I am of the view that no purpose would be served if the proceedings are continued as per the compromise respondent No. 2 will not support the case of the prosecution and it will be a mere wastage of precious time of the Court. Crl. Misc. No. M-34483 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. 483 dated 25.9.2007 registered at Police Station Sector-17, Chandigarh under Sections 452, 506, 34 and all subsequent proceedings arisen out of the same are quashed. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) 27.01.2010 JUDGE reena