NIRMAL SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No. 1447 dated 24.10.1997 under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 IPC registered at police station City Karnal and all other subsequent proceedings.
(2.) THE FIR against the petitioners was registered under Sections 498-A, 506, 406 IPC on the statement of Sanjana Rani complainant. The petitioners have sought quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings on the ground that with great efforts made by both the families a written compromise dated 19.1.2000 has been effected. It has further been pleaded that both the parties have agreed to put an end to all the civil and criminal proceedings pending in various courts and they have also agreed not to keep their relation as husband and wife. The learned counsel for both the parties submitted that the parties have settled their dispute, therefore, the parties may be allowed to compound the offence as the offences under Section 498-A, 506, 406 IPC are non- compoundable.
(3.) I have considered the submission made by he learned counsel for the parties. The offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 IPC are non-compoundable but taking into consideration the circumstances of each case, the High Court exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can allow the compounding of the offence in non-compoundable offences. In State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy, AIR 1977 SC 1489, their Lordships have held as under :- "In the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters it designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. In a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame prosecution, the very nature of the material on which the structure of the prosecution rests and the like would justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the interest of justice. The ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice has got to be administered according to laws made by the legislature. The compelling necessity for making these observations is that without a proper realisation of the object and purpose of the provision which seeks to save the inherent powers of the High Court to do justice between the State and its objects it would be impossible to appreciate the width and contours of that salient jurisdiction." ;