The main legal point established in the judgment is that the High Court has the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in cases where the parties have settled their dispute, but this power should be exercised sparingly and with caution, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences.

Suresh Kait, J.

1. Vide the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.922/2015 registered at Police Station New Usmanpur, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 307/341/34 of the IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against them.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2, Shahrukh Ansari as a scuffle took place due to misunderstanding. The matter is pending for initial stage of investigation with the police. Meanwhile, the respondent No.2 has amicably settled his disputes with the petitioners vide Compromise Deed dated 07.10.2015. Both the petitioners as well as the respondents are living in the same vicinity.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer of the case. He is not disputing the statement made by learned counsel for petitioners. The affidavit of respondent No.2 is at Page No.16 of the petition. Further submit that the matter has been settled with the petitioners, thus, he does not wish to pursue this case further and has no objection if the present petition is allowed.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submits that matter is pending at the initial stage of investigation. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and the respondent No.2/complainant does not wish to pursue the case against the petitioners, therefore, looking to the overall circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings. Thus, the State has no objection if the present petition is allowed.

5. Undisputedly, offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC is not compoundable, however, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, this Court has power to accept the compromise. This issue has been decided by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case titled as Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 2 SCC (L&S) 998 wherein held as under:-

“61....... the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences Under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil favour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the