Crl. Misc. No.40560 of 2009 and - 1 - CRM-M-22426 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Crl. Misc. No.40560 of 2009 and CRM-M-22426 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 24.10.2009 **** Sandeep Singh @ Sonu and others . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab and another . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: Mr.Liaqat Ali, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat, AAG, Punjab for respondent No.1/State. Mr.Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for Mr.Tejinder Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘Cr.P.C’) for quashing of the FIR No.182 dated 5.12.2007 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 325, 323, 34, 201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Dehlon, Tehsil and District Ludhiana and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 4.8.2009 (Annexure P-2). The complainant as well as the accused are residents of the same village Gujarwal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. After the investigation of the aforesaid FIR, challan has already been presented. Crl. Misc. No.40560 of 2009 and - 2 - CRM-M-22426 of 2009 It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that earlier due to the interventions of the respectables of the village, parties have entered into a compromise dated 4.8.2009 (Annexure P-2) and an affidavit to this effect has been sworn by the complainant. Notice of motion was issued. In response thereto, respondents have put in appearance. Complainant, Baljinder Singh son of Nirmal Singh is being represented by Tajinder Singh, Advocate, who has not only filed his Power of Attorney but also filed another affidavit dated 17.8.2009 duly sworn by Baljinder Singh (complainant). Out of three accused, accused Sandeep Singh @ Sonu (petitioner No.1) and Ajmer Singh @ Bhola (petitioner No.2) are present in the Court, who have been identified by their counsel Mr.Liaqat Ali, whereas, Baljinder Singh (complainant) has been identified by Mr.Vishal Aggarwal, who is appearing as a proxy counsel for Mr.Tajinder Joshi, Advocate. I have asked both the parties, namely, petitioners No.1 and 2 and the complainant/respondent No.2 about the compromise who have stated that compromise has actually been effected and there is no change in it till today. The present FIR has been registered under Sections 325, 323, 34, 201 IPC. As per Section 320 Cr.P.C., Section 323 IPC is compoundable by the person, who has suffered the injury and Section 325 IPC is compoundable by the person, who has suffered the injury with the permission of the Court. So far as Section 201 IPC is concerned it is not provided under Section 320 Cr.P.C. However, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the decision of the larger Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Crl. Misc. No.40560 of 2009 and - 3 - CRM-M-22426 of 2009 Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab and others, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , the said offence can also be compounded by invoking inherit jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the fact that both the parties to the dispute belongs to the same village and they have resolved their dispute to live amicably and peacefully, I find it to be a fit case for quashing of the FIR (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings, which are now pending before the Court of Smt. Amita Singh, JMIC, Ludhiana, and as such the same are hereby quashed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) OCTOBER 24, 2009 JUDGE vivek