Vinay Joshi, J.

Admit. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The accused of Regular Criminal Case No.1919 of 2017 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur has approached for quashment of First Information Report No.80 of 2017 dated 28/02/2017 registered at Sakkardara Police Station and for termination of concerned criminal proceeding.

3. The applicant contended that during the course of proceedings, the matter has been amicably settled in between the parties and therefore to maintain the harmony, he prayed to quash the proceedings by way of invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court in terms of section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the “Code”). It reveals that a victim girl aged 20 years had lodged report dated 28/02/2017 with concerned Police of Sakkardara Police Station, Nagpur alleging that on 27/02/2017 around 9.30 a.m. the applicant/accused caught her hand, forcibly pulled her at his person and by holding hairs dragged her to some extent. Accordingly, the crime was registered against the applicant/accused for commission of offence punishable under sections 354 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against applicant/accused. It is informed that Trial Court has framed charge and the case is pending for recording evidence of prosecution witnesses.

4. The learned counsel appearing for applicant/accused would submit that both parties are familiar to each other and they decided to settle their dispute amicably to maintain good relations. It is submitted that the incident for which applicant is charge-sheeted, is of personal nature meaning thereby it is not against the public at large nor it is heinous one. Therefore, he prayed to quash the F.I.R. as well as criminal case. The applicant/accused submitted that framing of charge would not come in the way of this Court for invoking powers under section 482 of the Code, and for that purpose relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in 2014 (6) SCC 406. Precisely this criminal application has been filed under section 482 of the Code for quashing the proceeding on the basis of compromise arrived between the parties.

5. The informant girl filed affidavit dated 28/09/2018 by which she contended that the matter is settled and she has no objection to quash the F.I.R. as well as criminal proceeding. On last date i.e. on 22/10/2018 the informant girl appeared in Court and reiterated about amicable settlement between the parties. The order of this Court dated 22/10/2018 reflects that the factum of settlement was verified and recorded.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor neither disputed the factual aspect nor questioned the genuineness of settlement. He resisted the application only on technical ground that, since the Trial Court has framed charge, the powers under section 482 of the Code cannot be invoked. Precisely, he would submit that criminal case has travelled much till framing of charge and therefore the inherent powers cannot be exercised at such belated stage. In support of said contention, he placed reliance on reported case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr., reported in 2012 (9) SCC 460.

7. The short question falls for consideration is about competency of this Court to invoke inherent powers in terms of section 482 of the Code at the stage when charge has been already framed by Trial Court. The plain reading of section 482 of the Code nowhere restricts or puts limitation on the powers of this Court in any manner. The object of section 482 of the Code is duel i.e., to prevent abuse of the process of any Court, or to secure the ends of justice. The non-obstance clause conveys that the inherent powers of this Court are unfettered meaning thereby has not been limited or restricted by any criteria. While entertaining the application for quashment of crimin