JUDGMENT 1. - This application has been directed against the order dated July 6, 1988, passed by the Additional District and Sections Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur by which he partly allowed the application submitted by the parties for compounding the case. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioners are facing trial for offence under Sections 323, 324, 325 and 307 I.P.C. A cross-case was also filed against the opposite party. 3. With the intervention of the reputed persons of the village and to maintain harmony between the parties, the parties compromised the dispute, An application was moved before trial court, compounding the offence under Sections 325, 307, 147 I.P.C. This application was signed by all the witnesses, injured and also the complainant The trial court vide its order dated July 6, 1988, compounded the offence under Sections 323, 324, 325 I.P.C. but did not pass any order for offence under Section 307 I.P.C. In these circumstances, the petitioners submitted this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C with the prayer that the trial court may be directed to accord permission to compound the offence under section 307 IPC. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, Mahesh Chand and another v. State of Rajasthan, reported in AIR 1988 S C. 2111 , and a judgment of this Court Shiv Nath & others v. State, reported in R.Cr.C. 1990, 174 . Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the cross case permission was granted and the matter was allowed to be compromised. But in the present case the lower court, though allowed the offences under Sections 323, 324 & 325 I.P.C. to be compounded but did not pass any order presumably on the ground that Section 3 20 Cr.P.C. does not authorise the trial court for granting permission for compounding the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. 5. Having regard to the nature of the offence and the circumstances, particularly the fact that the parties have compromised their dispute, it would be in the interest of justice that permission be granted to then to compound the offence under Section 307 IPC also. In similar circumstances, permission for compounding the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. was granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6. In this view of the matter. In similar circumstances, permission for compounding the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. was granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6. In this view of the matter. I allow the application and direct the trial court to accord permission to compound the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. As the parties have already submitted a written compromise, which has also been verified by the trial court as such there is no necessity of giving a notice to the .opposite party.Appln. allowed. *******