JUDGMENT

Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of S.S.T. No. 126 of 2018 (State v. Kallu @ Alok), arising out of Case Crime No. 168 of 2018, under Sections 323 , 504, 506,332,353 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal.

3. The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably.

4. Pursuant to the order dated 28.07.2022 passed in Application under Section 482 No. 22293 of 2022, parties appeared before the court below and the court below vide order dated 05.08.2022 verified the compromise deed filed by the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably.

6. In the present case, the sections involved are Sections 323 , 504, 506,332,353 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act.

7. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the court below has verified the contents and parties of the compromise deed to the extent that the parties and contents of the compromise deed are genuine and they have entered into the compromise by free-will.

8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal case.

9. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer by submitting that present matter relates to the provisions of SC/ST Act and being special act, proceedings merely on the basis of compromise should not be quashed but he could not dispute the fact that the dispute between the parties appears to be private in nature and both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compromise was also duly verified by the court below pursuant to the order passed by this Court.

10. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

11. In the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim. The view expressed in the said judgement has been affirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466.

12. The three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in [AIR 2019 SC 1290] discussed and considered the power of this Court in respect of quashing of non compoundable offences on the basis of the compromise executed between the parties.

13. Further, the three judges Bench of the Apex Court in case of Ramawatar v. State of M.P. AIR 2021 SC 5228 observed as:-

"15. Ordinarily, when dealing with offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ST Act, the Court will be extremely circumspect in its approach. The SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper castes. The Courts have to be mindful of the fact that the Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution, with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of ca