CRM No.M 21818 of 2010 # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAT AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No.M 21818 of 2010 Date of Decision:-05.08.2010 Ramanjit Singh & Ors. ......Petitioners. Versus State of Punjab & Anr. ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab. Mr. O.P. Hoshiarpuri, Advocate for Respondent No.2. JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Present petition under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code is for quashing of FIR No.148 dated 13.12.2003 under sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station Bhogpur, District Jalandhar and the subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromise arrived at between the accused/petitioners and the complainant. CRM No.M 21818 of 2010 # 2# Petitioner is the husband of complainant-wife(respondent no.2). Petitioner no.2 & 3 are mother and grand mother of petitioner no.1 respectively. Upon notice respondent-2 wife has put in appearance in court, who has been identified by her counsel. She has also filed affidavit dated 5.8.2010 wherein she has deposed that she has no objection if the present FIR against the petitioner is quashed on the payment of balance amount of rupees five lacs to be paid in the court. Petitioner no.1-husband is present in the court and has been identified by his counsel and he has tendered a draft of rupees five lacs in the name of respondent no.2 Gurpreet Kaur. The draft has been handed over to her. Her statement has been recorded separately. In view of the fact that the petitioners have amicably settled the dispute and complainant wife is no longer willing to pursue the prosecution of the petitioner, in my opinion no useful purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings. 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 CRM No.M 21818 of 2010 # 3# 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 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 Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.148 dated 13.12.2003 under sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station Bhogpur, District Jalandhar and all CRM No.M 21818 of 2010 # 4# subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 05th August, 2010 Vinay.