The court can quash criminal proceedings if the settlement between the victim and offender makes the possibility of conviction remote and bleak, and continuation of the criminal case would cause oppression and prejudice to the accused.

U.C. Dhyani, J.

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs, among others:

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR dated 11.11.2016 (contained as Annexure -1) registered as Case Crime No. 65 of 2016, under Section 308 of IPC, P.S. Khanpur, District Haridwar.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in Case Crime No. 65 of 2016, under Section 308 of IPC, P.S. Khanpur, District Haridwar till the pendency of present petition.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the private respondents, perused the documents brought on record and considered the grounds taken up in the writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the both the parties stated that the parties have buried their differences and have settled their disputes amicably. Injured Vipul is minor. His father Mangeram (respondent no. 3) who is lodgeder of the FIR/complainant, is present is present in person, duly identified by his counsel Mr. B. M. Pingal, Advocate. He says that he has no grievance left against the writ petitioner and he is not interested in prosecuting the petitioner, inasmuch as, the dispute has been settled amicably between the parties with the intervention of some elderly persons of the society. In other words, respondent no. 3 (father of the minor injured) has exonerated the present petitioner. Petitioner Sunil Kumar is also present in person duly identified by his counsel Mr. Vivek Shukla, Advocate.

4. Offence under Section 308 of IPC is a non-compoundable offence within the Scheme of Section 320 Cr.P.C. The question, which arises for consideration of this Court, is- whether the respondent no. 3 (father of the victim) should be permitted to compound the offence under Section 308 of IPC alleged against the petitioner or not?

5. Learned counsel for the parties also drew the attention of this Court towards the ruling of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160, in which Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as below:

“The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimon