The legal framework for recognizing compromises in criminal disputes must balance the wishes of the parties with the impact on society, and consider the nature and gravity of the crime as a key consideration in quashing criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral) - This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing on its merits, the FIR No.77 dated 07.05.2017 registered under Section 306 IPC at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Notice of motion was issued on 21.11.2017, pursuant to which, reply on behalf of the State was filed and taken on record. However, during pendency of the petition, the parties seemed to have settled their dispute amicably as the matter was pertaining to matrimonial dispute. Accordingly, an application was moved by counsel for the petitioners for placing on record the affidavit dated 18.08.2019 of the complainant Sh. Ashok Gupta (Annexure A-l) along with the Compromise Deed dated 18.08.2019 (Annexure A-2).

3. Vide order dated 02.09.2019, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their statements recorded; as to the genuineness of the compromise. In compliance thereof, report of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, dated 20.09.2019, has been received, wherein, it has been noticed that the matter has been compromised with the intervention of respectable and friends of both the parties, compromise has been effected with their free consent and without any pressure or undue influence from any quarter.

4. The ultimate aim, objective and goal of a legal system is to reconcile the social conflicts. Law is required only to ensure that people do not have to fight with each other just to protect their right to property, right to life and liberty and other rights secured to them by the legal system. The civil disputes are the conflicts between two parties, having lesser overtones for the social order, social harmony or the society as such. Hence absolute freedom is given to the parties to settle their disputes by compromises, of course, coming with certain legal consequences as well. However, the criminal disputes do not necessarily restrict themselves to only two parties to the dispute in terms of their scope, consequences and effect. The criminal acts tend to cast their effect and consequences even upon the society at large. Therefore, the law prescribes punishment, severe punishments and the extreme punishments, including death penalty for criminal acts.

5. However more often then not the civil disputes or inter-se conflicts of two parties transforms themselves into criminal aspect. Therefore, the legal system plays empire to resolve the conflict between two parties; with the added task of ensuring that the adverse impact of dispute qua society at large is minimized. But still the core idea is to resolve the conflict between two sides by putting it to rest. Therefore, even the criminal law is required to give due regard to the wishes of the parties to dispute. Recognizing this principle only, the Indian legal System also provides for recognizing the compromise between two sides of a criminal dispute. Section 320 Cr.P.C. is an express provision in this regard. This section not only provides for compounding during the trial, but permits compounding even at appellate or revisional stage. However by its very nature and scope, Section 320 Cr.P.C. cannot be the sole repository; wherein the recognition to a compromise between the parties have; necessarily; to be confined. This section relates only to the offences prescribed under the Indian Penal Code. There are a lot more offences prescribed outside IPC. Even to the offences existing in the IPC new dimensions are added from time to time, making the existing offences to be lighter or stringent and even new modalities of proof of offences are being recognised in view of technological advancement. This necessitates and requires the need for looking beyond Section 320 Cr.P.C. to recognise the compromise between the parties to dispute. But to maintain the sanctity of the procedure prescribed for criminal trial; the Trial Court cannot be permitt