JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned. 2. The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 17.9.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 4, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Sessions Case No. 171/2012 "State v. Thana Ram & Ors . whereby the learned Trial Court refused to accept the compounding application filed by the petitioners and the respondent No. 2 complainant in Sessions Case No. 171/2012 to the extent of the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 458 and 459 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the complainant submit that subsequent to the registration of the case, the parties have decided to mutually settle their disputes and accordingly, the compromise application was filed before the Trial Court. The said compromise application was accepted so far as the offences under Sections 323, 427 and 325 I.P.C. was concerned but was rejected for the remaining offences holding them to be non-compoundable. They submit that as, the parties are neighbours and have decided to bury their disputes and live together amicably in peaceful circumstances, the proceedings of the criminal case should have been terminated on the basis of the mutual settlement between the parties. 4. It is evident that the parties have decided to resolve their disputes by way of the mutual settlement. In a dispute of this nature wherein the parties decide to settle their differences by way of mutual consent, accepting the compromise for quashing the proceedings would give rise to peace and harmony between the parties. Thus, it is expedient in the interest of justice to accept the compromise for quashing the proceedings by exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in JT 2012(9) SC 426 . has issued guidelines and has interpreted that the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Should be exercised to quash the proceedings of a case wherein the parties arrived at a mutual settlement. 5. Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion that permitting continuance of the proceedings of the case going on against the petitioners in the Trial Court deserve to be quashed by exercising the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.Accordingly, the misc. 5. Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion that permitting continuance of the proceedings of the case going on against the petitioners in the Trial Court deserve to be quashed by exercising the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.Accordingly, the misc. petition is allowed. The proceedings of the Sessions Case No. 171/2012 are hereby quashed.Petition allowed. *******