JUDGMENT
I.A. Ansari, J.
1. By making an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, who are accused in C.R. Case No. 55/2001 under Sections 384/447/326/307/34 IPC, which is pending in the Court of Shri J. Gohain, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, Assam, have approached this Court seeking to get set aside the orders, dated 2.6.2001, and 23.7.2001, whereby summons were directed to be issued to the accused-petitioners for their appearance in the said complaint case and also to get set aside and quashed the proceedings of the said complaint case as a whole. This application has given rise to Crl. Revision No. 510/2001.
2. Coupled with the above, by making another application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the accused/petitioners aforementioned alongwith the legal heirs of the complainant of the C.R. Case No. 55/2001 aforementioned have submitted to the effect, inter alia, that a querrel between the parties led to the institution of not only C.R. Case No. 55/2001 aforementioned, but also to G. R. Case No. 81/2001 (Corresponding to Bokajan P. S. Case No. 26/2001 under Sections 342/325/354/506/34 IPC), the parties are relatives, they have compromised the disputes existing between them, they wish to live in peace and harmony with each other, and, hence, the C. R. Case No. 55/2001 aforementioned as well as C, R. Case No. 26/ 2001 aforementioned be allowed to be compounded and disposed of.
3. I have perused the materials on record. I have heard Mr. B. C. Das, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners, and Mr. A. L. Mandal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the legal heirs of the complainant abovenamed.
4. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the materials on record, what transpires is that the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused-petitioners are under Sections 384/447/307/326/34 IPC. The offences under Sections 307/326 and 384 IPC are not compoundable. However, the power vested in the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings pr FIR or complaint to meet the ends of justice is not subject to the limitations imposed by Section 320 Cr.P.C., which contains the list of offences, which may be conpounded. Reference may be made to B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003 AIR SCW 1824), wherein the Apex Court has laid down as follows :
“…. we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.”
5. In the case at hand, since the parties concerned have amicably settled their disputes and have decided to live in peace and harmony with each other, there is no reason why they shall not be allowed to live in peace and harmony instead of making them indulge in litigation’s. The interest of justice demands that amicable settlements, if arrived at voultarily and bonafide, be encouraged.
6. Considering, therefore, the matter in its entirety, I am of the view that the present one is a fit case in which this Court shall exercise its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings of C.R. Case No. 55/2001 aforementioned.
7. In the result and for the reasons discussed above, the orders, dated 2.6.2001, and 23.7.2001, and the whose proceedings of C.R. Case Nos. 55/2001 aforementioned, including the complaint made therein, are hereby set aside and quashed.
8. Before parting with the records, it is made clear that the parties concerned shall be at liberty to make appropriate application for compromising C.R. Case No. 86/2001 (corresponding to Bokajan P. S. Case No. 26/2001 under Sections 342/325/354/506/34 IPC) aforementioned and in case such an application for compromise is made, the same shall be disposed of by the learned Court below in accordance with law.
9. The Criminal Revision No. 510/2001 and the Misc. Case No. 49/2003 shall stand disposed of in terms of the above directions.
10. No order as to costs.
11. Let the LCRs be sent back.