C. Praveen Kumar, J.

1. This Criminal petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to record the compromise and quash the proceedings in P.R.C. No. 42 of 2012 on the file of the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Court at Nampalli. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/informant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the 2nd respondent-State.

2. A charge sheet came to be filed against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC). The case of the prosecution is as follows:

"On 13-2-2012 at about 8.30 a.m. the statement of the 1st respondent/informant was recorded by the Sub Inspector of Police, Musheerabad police Station while he was taking treatment in male burns Ward at Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad. The said statement discloses that the 1st respondent was residing in a house bearing D. No. 1-5-34 behind the police station, Musheerabad along with other roommates. On 11-2-2012 at about 7.30 p.m. there was a quarrel between the 1st respondent and one K. Venkata Rama Rao, his roommate, in connection with throwing out the dust from the room. In the said quarrel, both of them pushed each other and the K. Venkata Rama Rao, the petitioner herein, is alleged to have received an injury to his eye. Keeping this in mind, on the intervening night of 12/13-2-2012 at about 3.00 a.m. when the other roommates were sleeping, the petitioner is alleged to have poured boiled oil on the face of the 1st respondent. As a result of which the informant received burn injuries on his face, chest and shoulders. One Rajkumar who was sleeping by the side of the 1st respondent also received injuries, Basing on the statement of the injured, the above case came to be registered against the petitioner."

3. Along with the present Criminal Petitioner, the informant filed Crl. M.P.(SR) No. 34189 of 2013 along with a joint memorandum signed by the petitioner and 1st respondent seeking permission of the Court to compound the offence. Both the parties were present in the Court on 19-9-2013. When examined, the 1st respondent stated that he has settled the matter with the petitioner and has no objection for quashing the proceedings against the petitioner. When questioned as to why he wants to compromise the matter is spite of receiving burn injuries on the face which almost led to disfiguration of the face, the 1st respondent stated that he comes from a very poor family and that the petitioner has paid substantial amount towards his treatment and also for the future treatment which he has to take. He pleads that if any order is passed adverse to the petitioner, he will not be in a position to pay back the money received and it would be difficult for him to raise money for his future treatment. Both the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent are students and the 1st respondent was pursuing his 3rd year M.C.A. course by the time of the incident. The affidavit filed in support of the application would also disclose that there was a quarrel between the 1st respondent and the accused in which the petitioner received an injury near his eye. Thereafter, on the intervening night of 12/13-2-2012 the petitioner is alleged to have boiled oil in a vessel and poured the same on the face of the 1st respondent. The affidavit discloses that at the instance of elders and well wishers, both the sides have settled the dispute out of Court and that the compromise was arrived at without any coercion from any quarters. In fact, both of them seem to have approached the police requesting them to close the matter keeping in view their future. But the police expressed their inability stating that they have no jurisdiction to close the case.

4. Before proceeding further in this case, it would be appropriate to refer to certain cases dealing with the compounding of offences in non compoundab