The court's decision established the principle that the inherent power under section 482 CrPC can be invoked to quash criminal proceedings based on a voluntary compromise and considering the societal impact of the offences.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

1. The petitioners arraigned as an 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 the compromise with the victims. The petitioners and the private respondents 2 to 4 are descendants of same parents, and cross-cases were registered against them.

2. The complainant Joginder Singh was the real brother of petitioner no. 1-Balwinder Singh. During the pendency of the matters, one of the victims Joginder Singh expired for causes not connected with the present FIR. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition.

3. After that, the petitioners came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the injured have been impleaded as respondent(s).

4. The injured respondent no. 3, Avinderjit Singh appeared before the court of JMIC Batala and for his identity, the copy of his AADHAR card was attested by JMIC on 6-1-2022. He stated on oath that the families have buried their hatchets and compromised all disputes, and after that are living peacefully and have no grudge against each other. He gave his no objection for the quashing of FIR. The fourth respondent, the injured victim Paramjit Kaur, the daughter of complainant Joginder Singh testified in terms similar to her brother (R-3). All the accused also testified before the court to the similar effect. As per the concerned court's report dated 19-01-2022, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat.

ANALYSIS & REASONING:

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

a) The parties belong to same family and are in blood relations, living in houses adjacent to each other. 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 tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness;

g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, incorrigible, or professional offender;

h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family, community, and society;

i) The exercise of the inherent power for quashing the FIR and all consequentialproceedings is justified to secure the ends of justice.

6. In the present case, the offences under section 307, 324, 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:

' That both the parties have buried all their grudges and enmities and have settled their all disputes with each other because both the parties belong to respectable families and they want to maintain peace and harmony in their lives.'

8. The injured and all the accused had appeared before the Court of JMIC and had st