Mohd. Najir and Others vs State of Punjab and Aer.

Jaswant Singh, J.—Prayer u/s 482 Cr.P.C is for quashing of FIR No. 152 dated 10.10.2010 under Sections 308/341/323/506/148/149

IPC, P.S City Malerkotla, District Sangrur on the basis of compromise.

As per allegations in the FIR, when the complainant along with his son was going to his house, all the accused-Petitioners armed with baseball

bat, Danda, hockey, Bugdha and gandasis in their respective hands raised lalkara and inflicted severe injuries to the son of the complainant for

capturing their pigeons.

Vide order dated 1.12.2010, this Court directed the learned trial Court to send report with regard to compromise in pursuance of which, a

report/letter dated 9.12.2010 has been received in connected petition bearing Crl.M. No. 33869-M of 2010 from the SDJM, Malerkotla, which

has been taken on record as Mark-A. It is stated in the report that the complainant has arrived at a compromise with the accused-Petitioners and

he has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise.

Learned state counsel, on instructions from HC Balwinder Singh, states that he is unable to raise any serious objection to the quashing of the

FIR on the basis of the compromise since the complainant is not willing to support the prosecution case.

Hon''ble Supreme Court in, B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another, has made it explicitly clear in para 15 of its judgment that

the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit

or effect the powers u/s 482 of the Code.

A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2007(3) RCR 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate

cases, while exercising powers u/s 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 u/s 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the Crl.M. No. 34164-M of 2010 #3# wide

power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar u/s 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse

of law and to secure the ends of justice.

Hon''ble Apex Court in another case in Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, while relying upon its decision in B.S.

Joshi''s case(supra) has also held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the technicalities should not be allowed to stand in

the way in the quashing of criminal proceedings and the continuance of the same after compromise between the parties would be a futile exercise.

Similar views were expressed by Hon''ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, , 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 impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the FIR in the

interest of justice.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 152 dated 10.10.2010 under Sections 308/341/323/506/148/149 IPC, P.S City

Malerkotla, District Sangrur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.