By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has been preferred by petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No.36/2022, registered at Police Station Lahar, District Bhind, for offences under Sections 363 , 366 , 376(3) , 376(2)(N) of IPC and Section 4(2) , 5(L) of the POCSO Act, and entire criminal proceedings pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahar, District Bhind in Special Case No.05/2022 arising out of Crime No.36/2022 against the petitioner.

2. From perusal of facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that FIR was registered on behalf of prosecutrix for offence under Sections 363 , 366 , 376(3) , 376(2)(N) of IPC and Section 4(2) , 5(L) of the POCSO Act and on the said complaint, case was registered regarding missing of prosecutrix Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 11/27/2025 6:39:44 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:30435 2 MCRC-51800-2025 and search was made for the girl. Thereafter prosecutrix was recovered and her medical examination was carried out and she was handed over to her parents. Now petitioner and prosecutrix married to each other and prosecutrix is living in her household peacefully and they both have blessed with a baby boy, who is at present 01 year's old. Therefore, this petition has been preferred.

3. Alongwith the petition, both the parties have filed I.A. No.23568/2025 and I.A. No.23569/2025 stating therein that the dispute between the parties has been resolved and they have entered into compromise with no intention to pursue the matter further.

4. In compliance of order passed by this Court, the factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court, who has recorded the statements of complainant/respondent No.2 as well as petitioner - accused and has submitted the report that the parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.

5. Fact remains that petitioner and respondent No.2 are married couple and both are living in same household as well as they both have blessed with a baby boy aged 01 year old. It is regular and easy to be retributive but at the same time a Judge has to sublimely feel the pulse of the case. One cannot forget that "Every "F I L E" with same alphabets, contains a "L I F E". (See :

6. Here "FILE" before this Court carries not only a "LIFE" but many Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 11/27/2025 6:39:44 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:30435 3 MCRC-51800-2025 LIVES.

7. In view of the above, it would be apposite to survey the law in respect of compounding in non-compoundable case. The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 after considering the the provisions of section 320 and 482 of the Cr.P.C held that the compounding can he permitted in a non-compoundable offence. Relevant part of the order of the order reads as under :-

8. In a subsequent order, in the case of Narinder Singh and Ors Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. passed in Criminal Appeal No.686/2014 dated 27.03.2014 after relying on the judgment passed in the case of Gian Singh (supra), the Apex Court permitted the compounding in a non-compoundable case and quashed the criminal proceedings.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:30435 4 MCRC-51800-2025

9. In the case of Daxaben vs. State of Gujarat (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1132-1155 of 2022), the Apex Court held that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is wide and can even be exercised to quash criminal proceedings relating to non-compoundable offences, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of Court. Where the victim and offender have compromised disputes essentially civil and personal in nature, the High Court can exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings.

10. In the case of State of M.P. vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, a Three Judge Bench of the Apex Court discussed the earlier judgments of 3 the Apex Court and laid down the principles in para-15. The relevant para- 15.1 and 15.2 are reproduced as under:-

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 11/27/2025 6:39:44 PM