Harwinder Singh and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Sabina, J.—This petition has been filed u/s 482 for quashing of the FIR No. 127 dated 4.9.2008, under Sections 406, 498A, 342 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ''IPC'') registered at Police Station City Nawanshahr, District Nawanshahr (Annexure P1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 4.12.2009 (Annexure P2).

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the parties have entered into compromise with the intervention of relatives and friends. Respondent No. 2 who is present in the Court along with her counsel has admitted the contents of the compromise (Annexure P2) and has also tendered her affidavit wherein she has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulvinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2007(3) RCR1052 High Court has power u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.

Hon''ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, in para Nos. 23 and 24 has held as under:

In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them where under the dues of the Banks have been cleared and Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the Appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this Court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised?

On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S. Joshi''s case (supra), and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also Clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filed by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.

Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 127 dated 4.9.2008, under Sections 406, 498A, 342 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in Cri. Misc. No. M-178 of 2010 (O& M) 3 short ''IPC'') registered at Police Station City, Nawanshahr, District Nawanshahr (Annexure P1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.