The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court can exercise its inherent power under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences, considering the nature of the offences, societal impact, and the terms of the compromise between the parties.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

1. The petitioners, arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on a compromise with the aggrieved persons.

2. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the aggrieved persons have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.

3. After that, the petitioners came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the aggrieved persons have been impleaded as respondents.

4. On 8-4-2022, the aggrieved persons Narinder Singh (R-2), Satnam Singh (R-3), Iqbal Singh (R-4), Bikker Singh (R-5), Harjeet Singh (R-6), and Rajinder Kumar (R-7) stated before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagraon that there would be no objection if the court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 16.04.2022, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat or coercion.

ANALYSIS & REASONING:

5. The State's counsel has severely opposed this compromise and seeks dismissal of the petition because of the heinous nature of the offence.

6. In the present case, the offences under section 308, 148, & 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) are not compoundable under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). However, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the prosecution qua the non-compoundable offences can be closed by quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.

7. It shall be appropriate to refer to the relevant portions of compromise deed, which is extracted as follows:

'2. That now the matter has been compromised between both the parties with the intervention of respectable persons and all ill will of the parties have come to an end. Because the second party Kamal jot Singh alias Kamal son of Mahinder Singh resident of Akalgarh, Tehsil Raikot had got registered D.D.R. No.26, dated 24.10.2014, under section 323, 324, 506, 149 1.P.C. at Police Station Sudhar against first party Narinder Singh alias Sethi son of Satnam Singh, resident of village Akalgaqrh, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana and Satnam Singh son of Kartar Singh, Iqbal Singh, Bikkar sons of Satnam Singh, Gora son of Bhupinder Singh, Rajinder Kumar son of Jyoti Parkash.

3. That both the parties belongs to same village and now till date the police has not submitted the challan. After the year 2014 no fight/quarrel was held between the parties and both the parties are living with peace and harmony. Now both the parties do not want to initiate any action against each other. From today none of the party will complaint against each other.'

8. The injured and all the accused had appeared before the Court of JMIC Jagraon and had stated that they had entered into a compromise qua crosscases. The parties belong to the same village and must be living there for generations and might continue to live, who knows for how long. In the closelyknit village community, when the parties have buried their hatchets, the continuation of criminal proceedings will not advance the reformative purposes of jurisprudence just for the sake of deterrence.

9. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -

a) The accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;

c) The victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

d) There is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or t