JUDGMENT : 1. - This is a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 1.9.2012 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)-cum-Metropolitan Magistrate, Jodhpur in Criminal Cas.e No. 50/2012 arising out of F.I.R. No. 53/2010 registered at Police Station, Basni, Jodhpur, to the extent, vide which, the compromise qua the offence under Section 377 of the I.P.C. has not been accepted in vide its order under Sections 109,115, offences. 2. The F.I.R. No. 53/2010 was registered at Police Station Basni, Jodhpur under Sections 109, 115, 118, 323 and 506 of the I.P.C. against the petitioners by the complainant-respondent No. 2 Smt. Natasha Tak, who is the wife of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioner No. 2, 3, 4 are the other relatives of petitioner No. 1 husband. During the pendency of the said case, the matter was compromised between the husband and wife, i.e. respondent No. 2 and petitioner No. 1 and other family members. In pursuance to the said compromise, mutual divorce petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the Family Court. The same is pending. Accordingly, an application was moved before the trial Court under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. for compounding the offences. The petitioners were discharged from the offences under Sections 109, 115, 118, 323 and 508 of the I.P.C. However, the offence under Section 377 of the I.P.C. was not compounded in view of the fact that the said offence is not compoundable. Hence, the present petition has been filed for quashing of the said offence. 3. The above facts leave no doubt that the matter has been compromised. The complainant-respondent No.2 Smt. Natasha Tak appeared before this Court in person and got her statement recorded. As per her statement, the matter has been compromised out of her own free will and it was further stated that she has no objection if the F.I.R. No. 53/2010 is quashed qua the said offence i.e. under Section 377 of the I.P.C. An affidavit dated 19.12.2012 was also filed to the same effect. Tire said affidavit has been taken on record. Although the offence is serious, however, the same has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife. 4. Tire said affidavit has been taken on record. Although the offence is serious, however, the same has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife. 4. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and hearing the complainant-respondent No. 2, this Court is satisfied that the said compromise had been arrived without any pressure and the same is genuine. In case the said compromise is not accepted, the compromise arrived at between the parties with respect to other issues will also fall through and the parties will not be able to resettle in life causing harassment, humiliation and stress to the respondent-complainant. 5. The Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr., has observed as under: "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 reduced 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 the Court exercising its power under 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases, There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power." 6. The Apes Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, reported as (2008) 4 SCC 582 emphasised in Para No. 6 as follows: "6. 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 the 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. 7. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law. 7. In view of the well settled proposition of law as also discussion above, this Court has no inhibition in accepting the said compromise arrived at between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the present F.I.R. qua the offence under Section 377 of the I.P.C. 8. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. petition is allowed. The petitioners are discharged from the offence under Section 377 of the I.P.C. and accordingly, F.I.R. No. 53/2010 registered at Police Station Basni, Jodhpur as well as proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R. are quashed.Petition allowed. *******