Shekhar and Others vs State of Haryana and Another

Nirmaljit Kaur, J.—This is a petition u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No. 292 dated 20.05.2009 under Sections 323, 324, 332, 427, 34 of Indian Penal Code, P S Sadar, Karnal (Annexure P-1) which was got registered by Respondent No. 2 -complainant against the present Petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 25.07.2009 arrived at between the parties. Copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.

Vide order dated 26.11.2010, the parties were directed to appear before the trial court on 15.12.2010 and make statements regarding the matter having been compromised. Report from the trial Court was also called for.

In pursuance to the same, the District and Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide his letter dated 17.12.2010 has forwarded the report of the trial Court. As per the report submitted by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal, it is evident that the parties have genuinely arrived at a compromise and complainants are not interested in further prosecution of the matter against the accused persons.

The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr 2007 (3) RCR 1052 has observed as under:

The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduced friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the court exercising its power u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power.

The Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:

We need to emphasize 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.

The said compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure. The complainants have no objection if the said FIR is quashed.

Taking into account the allegations, compromise dated 25.07.2009 as well as report submitted by the trial Court, verifying the authenticity of the said compromise, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 292 dated 20.05.2009 under Sections 323, 324, 332, 427, 34 of Indian Penal Code, P S Sadar, Karnal (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

Allowed in the aforesaid terms.