The court can exercise its power under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement between the parties, with the aim of securing the ends of justice and preventing abuse of the court's process.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, A.C.J —S/Sh.Akshit Kumar, Gourav Raj Pista, Gulshan Kumar, Happy @ Hem Singh and Musafir Chauhan (petitioners) and Sahil (respondent No.2) are present in Court and stand duly identified by their respective learned counsel.

2. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ''Code'') has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the FIR No.121/2017, dated 28.08.2017, registered at Police Station, Dhalli, Shimla, H.P., under the provisions of Sections 341, 323, 506 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and all the consequential proceedings arising thereof.

3. It is alleged by the complainant that on 16.08.2017, at about 2.00 pm, when he alongwith his friends came out of the college at that time the petitioners restrained him as also his friends from moving ahead and give beatings with fist blows and also threatened with dire consequences. One of the petitioners also gave him beating blow with spade. As a result of such beatings he sustained injuries.

4. The matter was reported to the police, by the complainant, on the basis of which FIR No.121/2017, dated 28.08.2017, came to be registered against the present petitioners.

5. This petition stood filed on the premise that the matter stands compromised between the present petitioners and the private respondent vide compromise deed (Annexure P-2, dated 18.12.2017) .

6. Today, the case was taken up for consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that matter stands compromised between Akshit Kumar, Gourav Raj Pista, Gulshan Kumar, Happy @ Hem Singh & Musafir Chauhan (petitioners) and Sahil (respondent No.2) , present in Court.

7. That this is not such a case wherein the offences for which the petitioner has been charged can be stricto sensu held to be the offences against the State. Even otherwise, when matter stands compromised, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and the continuation of the criminal case against the petitioner would put him to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to them by not quashing the criminal case.

8. In Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr , (2014) 4 JT 573 the Hon''ble Supreme Court after summing up the legal position has laid down the following guidelines for the High Court in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its powers 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, which reads thus:-

"(I) 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 themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.

(II) When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:

(i) ends of justice, or

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.

(III) Such a power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having overwhel