ARVIND KUMAR,J - (1.) THROUGH the instant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has sought for quashing of FIR No. 25 dated 31.3.2008, registered against him under Sections 307 IPC, at Police Station Mehtiana, and all other consequent proceedings, on the basis of compromise having been entered between the parties.
(2.) THE impugned FIR has been registered on the basis of statement made by respondent No. 2 Harbans Singh to the effect that the petitioner had caused him grievous injuries with an intention to kill. Respondent No. 2 Harbans Singh has also submitted his reply by way of an affidavit authenticating the compromise, Annexure P-2, entered into between the parties with the intervention of respectable persons. He and his nephew have also made statement in Court to the same effect, which are duly authenticated by his counsel. He has thus, stated that they have no grudge against each other, and has prayed for quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings, in the interest of justice. By now it is fully settled that the High Court in exercise of inherent powers can quash the proceedings if it finds that allowing of any such proceedings to continue would be an abuse of process of the Court or that ends of justice require that the proceedings be quashed. In the case of State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswami, AIR 1977 SC 1489, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the ends of justice are higher then ends of mere law, though justice has got to be administered according to the laws made by the legislature yet the Court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution.
(3.) IN the case of Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya and others, 1980(1) SCC 63, the essence of compromise has been summed up in following words : "The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion." ;