Point of Law:
Section 320 of the Code articulates public policy with regard to the compounding of offences. It catalogues the offences punishable under IPC which may be compounded by the parties without permission of the Court and the composition of certain offences with the permission of the court.

JUDGMENT :

1. This Application, under Section 482 / 483 Cr.P.C., has been filed by applicant with a prayer for setting aside the order dated 01.08.2009, passed in Criminal Case No. 987 of 2009, State Vs. Manish Jain, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 408 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Hathras Gata, District Mahamayanagar.

2. Learned counsel for applicant argued that there had been a mediation in between, wherein Delhi High Court passed following order:-

"...The respondent, who is present in Court, submits that she is ready and willing to withdraw all pending cases. In respect of the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner under Section 498A I.P.C. etc., she submits that the petition had been drafted and had been provided to the petitioner. The petitioner submits that he has filed his own petition before the Allahabad High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. being Crl. M.A. No.5330 of 2012. A copy of the order dated 10.2.2012 passed in those proceedings has been shown to the Court. It appears that the Court has directed the listing of the case after the expiry of four weeks time which was granted for filing of the counter affidavits. Since the period has expired, it appears that it is open to the parties to now again approach the Allahabad High Court to have the F.I.R. quashed. The parties agree that they would jointly move an application before the Allahabad for that purpose without any delay. The respondent states that she is willing to accompany the petitioner in the next week itself for moving the said application...."

It appears that this matrimonial dispute has been taken to mediation centre, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi wherein following compromise was filed:-

"The present suit for performance injunction has been referred by referral judge Shri Rakesh Kumar-I, CJ, Delhi and assigned to me for mediation. Process of Mediation explained. Matter discussed in joint session. After mutual discussions both the parties have reached at an amicable settlement on the following terms and condition:

(1) That the respondent is owner of flat in question i.e. B-403, Plot No.4 and 6, Sector 17, Sampada, Sea Wood Garden, Navi Mumbai. It is agreed between both the parties that one key of the flat would be remained with plaintiff and one key with defendant.

(2) That the Plaintiff can live in the above mentioned flat with her children and respondent can visit and see her children any time as and when he wishes and also he can live with their children and wife but for the first yer only wife will live with her children.

(3) Approximately Rs.20 lacs mutual fund, NSC, KVP and FDR's in the name of petitioner which defendant has deposited and will give to petitioner upto 25 th January, 2010.

(4) Respondent will deposit Rs.1 lac in the bank account of petitioner on 01.01.2010.

(5) After getting job the respondent will give Rs.25,000/-to 30,000/-to the petitioner towards maintenance of wife and children.

(6) That the parties will withdraw the following cases:

(a) Complaint under sections 498-A, 406, 34 I.P.c. on the date fixed i.e. 16.2.2010.

(b) Complaint under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on the date fixed i.e. 17.2.2010.

(c) Complaint under Section 12 of D.V. Act on the date fixed i.e. 15.01.2010.

(d) Above mentioned suit on date fixed i.e.23.01.2010

(e) The respondent will withdraw complain case under Section 323 I.P.C. on the date fixed i.e. 06.01.2010.

(7) That both the parties will live happily from today and will not file any case/complaint against each other. This is the full and final settlement between the parties and all the above mentioned cases will be withdrawn on the date fixed in the concerned court."

3. Despite this order, opposite party no. 2 has not filed joint affidavit before trial court. Applicant has given an accommodation for residence, in view of above mediation agreement, wherein she is residing. Huge amount of money has also been given to opposite party no. 2. But, in disregard of above settlement, entered in between, opposite par