THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.7505 of 2007 DATED: 22nd April, 2010 Between Shakeer Hussain and others …Petitioners AND The State of A.P. and another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.7505 of 2007 ORDER:- The Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioners to quash the proceedings in FIR No.102 of 2007 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Police Oficer, P.S., Adilabad Rural, Adilabad District. The second respondent herein – Partham Suvarna lodged a complaint to the police stating that she belongs to scheduled caste and that while she was in her hut at Ramnagar, the petitioners herein attacked her and abused her in the name of her caste and dismantled her hut. Basing on the said complaint, a case in Crime No.102 of 2007 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Police Oficer, P.S., Adilabad Rural, Adilabad District, for the offences punishable under Section 3 (1) (xi) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was registered. During pendency of the investigation, this petition has been filed. Now the petitioners and the de-facto complainant filed a petition stating that they have compromised the matter and that their compromise may be recorded and necessary orders may be passed. Though originally there are five accused, three of them i.e. A-1 to A-3 approached this Court by way of this petition. The de-facto complainant is present before this Court today and she stated that she has voluntarily compromised the matter with the petitioners / accused without any coercion. She has also stated that she is not pressing her complaint in respect of other accused who have not approached this Court. Once the parties have compromised on the advice of elders and in the interest of both the parties, continuing criminal proceedings will be a futile exercise and rather result in harassment of the accused. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied on the judgment reported in Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab[1] in which the Supreme Court, while dealing with a situation where some of the sections were non-compoundable, held as follows:- “We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” Once the parties have compromised the matter, I feel that the technicalities should not come in the way of doing justice. It is an age old and well established principle that every Court has inherent power to act ex debito justitiae to do that real and substantial justice for the administration of which alone it exists or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. In view of the above, I hold that it will be just and reasonable to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein in the interest of both the parties. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in FIR No.102 of 2007 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, P.S., Adilabad Rural, Adilabad District. _______________________________ JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR April 22, 2010 Bvv [1] 2008 (4) Supreme Court Cases 582