JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings pending in sessions Case No. 91/2005 (State v. Ravindra Singh & Ors.) , pending before Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur for the offence under Section 307 of IPC on the basis of compromise arrived between the parties on 01.02.2008 but the learned trial court below has refused to compound the offence under Section 307 IPC. Learned court below has compounded the offence under Section 323 IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant-respondent and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the compromise, which has been passed before fast track court. 3. Today, one of the complainants Ompal Singh furnished a affidavit to this effect that he has no grievances with the accused petitioner and does not want to prosecute the criminal case against the petitioner under Sections 307, 323 and 324 of IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Iddu v. The State of Raj. & Ors., reported in Crl. L.R. (Raj.) 2004 (1) Pg. 49 . In this case the FIR was lodged against the petitioner for the offences u/Ss 147, 148, 149, 447, 307, 307/149 IPC. The parties have after seeking permission of the trial court, compounded the offence u/s 323, 324 of IPC and the accused petitioners have been acquitted of these charges on the basis of the compromise but they are facing trial on charges which are not compoundable. Further, the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court. The Coordinate Bench of this Court relying on the judgment rendered by Honble Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors. reported in (2003) 4 SCC pg. 675 , allowed the petition and quashed and set aside criminal proceedings pending before the court below in the light of compromise arrived at between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-complainant further strengthens the averments made by the petitioners counsel. He submits that the complainants-respondents do not want to prosecute the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. 6. 675 , allowed the petition and quashed and set aside criminal proceedings pending before the court below in the light of compromise arrived at between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-complainant further strengthens the averments made by the petitioners counsel. He submits that the complainants-respondents do not want to prosecute the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and considering the ratio decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Iddu v. State, compromise and affidavit filed by Ompai Singh before this Court, it is not disputed that the parties have settled their dispute by entering into a compromise and they do not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings. The prosecution will be not get any result out of it, as it will prove to be futile exercise to continue with the criminal proceedings. 7. In the result, the petition stands allowed and the criminal proceedings in Sessions Case No. 91/2005 pending before the Addl. Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), No. 1 Jaipur city, Jaipur are hereby quashed. 8. Prayer for interim relief stands disposed of.Petition allowed. *******