- (1.) Harwinder Singh alias Hindi, Gurtej Singh alias Teji, Karnail Singh, Roop Kaur and Chhaju Singh alias Jarnail Singh, the petitioners have brought this petition under the provisions of section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 238 dated 27.10.2011 registered at Police Station Sadar Dhuri District Sangrur for an offence punishable under sections 148, 458, 323, 324 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code alongwith all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
(2.) On notice of the petition, Gurbax Singh, the complainant and his sons,namely Sandeep Singh and Randhir Singh, respondents No. 2 to 4 have appeared before me. They have been identified by ASI Gurmail Singh, Police Station Sadar, Dhuri. They admit that the matter has been compromised between the parties. In this regard, compromise deed dated 11.2.2012 has also been placed on record as Annexure P2. Compromise between the parties resolves their pending disputes which ultimately brings peace and harmony between the warring factions and restores tranquility in the society. With regard to the matrimonial offences, it has been held by this court in Dharambir Vs. State of Haryana, 2005 3 RCR(Cri) 426that even if the matrimonial offence is non compoundable, a case regarding the same could be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties to achieve the aforesaid object. However, the question arose as to whether quashing of cases for non-compoundable offences other than matrimonial offences, could be allowed and a Larger Bench of five Hon'ble Judges of this court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 3 RCR(Cri) 1052, has taken the following decision in the matter:- "29. 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 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."
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has cited before me a latest decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shiji @ Pappu and others Vs. Radhika and another, 2012 1 RCR(Cri) 9. It was a case for an offence punishable under section 394 IPC and was equally serious. In this case, FIR was quashed on the basis of compromise.;