The main legal point established is that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly and with caution, and can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings based on compromise, especially in cases with predominantly civil character.

P.S.TEJI, J.

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. hasbeen filed by the petitioner, namely, Danish Ahmed for quashing of FIR No.314/2013 dated 21.08.2013, under Section 380 IPC registered at Police Station Hauz Khas on the basis of compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.2, namely, Mr. Rohit Sudele on 26.09.2014.

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent no.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by SI Naveen Kumar.

3. Respondent No.2 present in the Court, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. As per the compromise deed, the petitioner shall compensate the loss which has been occurred to the respondent no.2 to the tune of Rs.40,000/- in full and final. The respondent no.2 agreed to withdraw FIR in question and will make all the efforts to get the matter quashed. It has also been agreed that no party of the present agreement will make any complaint against each other in any manner pertaining to the FIR in question. It has also been mentioned that the petitioner has paid Rs. 40,000/- in the presence of the witnesses by way of bank draft No. 555862 dated 20.11.2013 of Rs.20,000/- drawn on Axis Bank Ltd., Saket, Delhi. Further, the remaining amount of Rs.20,000/- has also been paid as Rs.10,000 has been paid by cash and another Rs. 10,000/- by way of draft No.060540 dated 25.09.2014 Axis Bank, Daryaganj, Delhi. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of the aforesaid compromise deed and of his affidavit dated 14.05.2015. As per the affidavit filed by respondent no.2, he has settled all his disputes with the petitioner and has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. All the disputes and differences have been resolved through mutual consent. Now no dispute with petitioner survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Statement of the respondent No.2 has been recorded in this regard in which he stated that he has entered into a compromise with the petitioner and has settled all the disputes with her. He further stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

4. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-

“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”

5. The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466. The relevant observations of the Apex Court in Narinder Singh (Supra) are as under:-

“29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:

29.1 Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between t