The High Court may quash criminal proceedings if the parties have settled their disputes amicably, emphasizing the distinction between quashing and compounding offences.

ORDER :

1. This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 B.N.S.S. for quashing of FIR No.286/2024 (dated 19.06.2024) registered at Police Station Behror, District Kotputali-Behror for the offences punishable under Section 307 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act and all consequential criminal proceedings, qua him.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a compromise has arrived at between the parties and they have settled their dispute amicably, so the criminal proceedings pending between them be quashed and set aside.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments and prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant acknowledges the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties and on instructions from the complainant, states that the complainant has no objection if the proceedings of FIR in question alongwith all consequential proceedings against the present accused-petitioner are quashed.

5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant.

6. A perusal of the material on record shows that the dispute between the parties has amicably been settled by them.

7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 has observed as under:-

“57. Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence. They are different and not interchangeable. Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a court under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of criminal proceedings by the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment.

58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt, crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrongdoing that seriously endangers and threatens the well-being of the society and it is not safe to leave the crime-doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the victim has been paid compensation, yet certain crimes have been made compoundable in law, with or without the permission of the court. In respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences h