THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PEITION No.3593 OF 2010 ORDER: All the petitioners-A1 to A4 present and the 1st respondent-complainant and her father present. Sri P.Bhaskara Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri M.V.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the 1st respondent, present. 2. It is stated by both parties that the matrimonial dispute has been resolved amicably out side the Court and the parties have reduced the terms of compromise by way of memorandum, signed by both, and the same is also filed along with this petition. 1st respondent-wife stated that she has previously received all the amounts, as mentioned in the Memorandum of Compromise by way of demand drafts and in cash and that in view of the terms of the compromise she is no longer interested in pursuing the complaint against the petitioners-A1 to A4. 3. In KULWINDER SINGH & OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER[1], a larger Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court held as follows: “The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord- tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.” It was further held as follows: “The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice”. 6. In the light of the principles laid down in the above decision; in view of the compromise entered into between the parties as per the conditions set out in the Memorandum of compromise, which are stated to have been acted upon, and also in view of the 1st respondent’s unwillingness to proceed further with the complaint filed by her, it is considered that no useful purpose would be served by continuing further proceedings against the petitioiners-A1 to A4 in C.C.No.366 of 2009 on the file of the learned X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad. 7. In the result, Criminal Petition is disposed of and further proceedings against the petitioners herein-A1 to A4 in 366 of 2009 on the file of the learned X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, are hereby quashed. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 22nd July, 2011. Tsy [1] 2007(3) 818 All India Criminal Law Reporter