Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.
Misc.
No.M-26792 of 2013 Date of decision: May 06, 2014 Meera Devi and others .Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another .Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surinder Gupta Present: Mr.S.S.Goraya, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Ms.Shivali, AAG, Punjab.
Mr.Vikas Nanda, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Surinder Gupta, J The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of the FIR No.102 dated 20.7.2013 (Annexure P-1).registered for offence under Sections 324, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Division No.6, Ludhiana, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).As per case of the prosecution, on 20.7.2013 at about 2.00 p.m.the petitioners armed with deadly weapons forcibly entered into the house of the complainant-respondent No.2 and inflicted injuries to him.
Upon notice, Ms.Shivali, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Mr.Vikas Nanda, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2- complainant.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded.
The trial court has sent its report dated 19.9.2013 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.
Kumar Deepak 2014.05.16 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.
Misc.
No.M-26792 of 2013 -2- Learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant has submitted that in view of the compromise (Annexure P/2).the private respondent (complainant) has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P/1) is quashed .
Learned State counsel has also not disputed the compromise (Annexure P/2).The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for quashing the impugned FIR is that the offence under Sections 452/148 IPC are not compoundable.
In case Kulwinder Singh versus State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, Full Bench of this Court has held that the FIR can be quashed on the basis of the compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.even if the offence is not compoundable.
In the instant case, the compromise has been effected with the intervention of the respectables and now the parties wish to live in peace and harmony.
Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed.
Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice.
The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties to this petition but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.
The offence in this case is not so heinous or serious that it cannot be settled by the parties through compromise.
In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is quashed.
May 06, 2014 (Surinder Gupta) deepak Judge Kumar Deepak 2014.05.16 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document