Ritu Bahri, J. 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 121 dated 25.12.2013 registered under Sections 307, 427, 148, 149 I.P.C. at Police station Begowal District Kapurthala on the basis of compromise between the parties. The F.I.R. was registered on a statement made by Malkiat Kaur wife of Karnail Singh. It was alleged that on 19.12.2013 at about 9:00 p.m., she with her husband Karnail Singh and daughter Daljit Kaur were at home. They heard the sound of a tractor trolley striking against the pillar of their main gate of their house. She and her husband came out and saw that the tiles affixed on the pillar of main gate have been broken. She and her husband told Jograj alias Joga son of Karnail Singh who was unloading the sand of their neighbour Gurnam Singh that he has caused loss to them by breaking the tiles of their main gate, which should be compensated to them. In the meantime, the owner of tractor trolley Malkiat Singh alias Minta son Mohinder Singh along with Balwinder Singh alias Bittu son of Pritam Singh, Mithan and Soni came at the spot. They asked Malkiat Singh @ Minta that his driver has broken the tiles by striking the trolley to the pillar of their main gate and caused loss to them and demanded compensation for that. Malkiat Singh @ Mima told them that he is not going to give them any compensation. He sat on this tractor Swaraj Marka 855 and started the same and came in front of their gate, where Malkiat Kaur stopped him and asked him to compensate them for the loss. On hearing this Malkiat Singh asked them to go away from the front of the Tractor and threatened to kill them. Thereafter, Malkiat Singh by accelerating his tractor at a fast speed with an intention to kill her struck her and due to the striking of the front tyre of the tractor, Malkiat Kaur got injured. Her husband Karnail Singh got her admitted to SGL Charitable Mustafabad for treatment. 2. The matter was investigated by the police and the challan was presented against the petitioner, whereas the other accused named in the F.I.R. were found innocent. 3. After presentation of the challan (Annexure P-2) and framing of charges, the compromise was effected (Annexure P-3). Her husband Karnail Singh got her admitted to SGL Charitable Mustafabad for treatment. 2. The matter was investigated by the police and the challan was presented against the petitioner, whereas the other accused named in the F.I.R. were found innocent. 3. After presentation of the challan (Annexure P-2) and framing of charges, the compromise was effected (Annexure P-3). Vide order of this Court dated 26.9.2014, the trial Court was directed to send a report with regard to validity or otherwise of the compromise after recording statement of parties and parties were also directed to appear before the trial Court and get their statements recorded with regard to the compromise. 4. In compliance of the order dated 26.9.2014 of this Court, Status report in this regard has been sent by Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala. As per the status report the compromise between the parties is valid and genuine. Statement of Malkiat Kaur has been recorded on 21.10.2014 to the effect that the compromise has been effected with her own sweet will and without any pressure coercion or threat of any person and she is having no ill will or grudge in her mind against the accused. She was to live in peace and harmony and compromise would be in the betterment and interest of both the parties. Statements of Jograj Singh, Malkiat Singh and Joga Singh have been recorded to the same effect. It has been further stated in the status report that the F.I.R. was registered against accused Malkiat Singh @ Minta, Jograj Singh, Balwinder Sibngh @ Bittu, Mithan and Soni Lal. However till date, only accused Malkiat Singh @ Minta and Jograj Singh have been sent up to face trail by the police of Police Station Begowal. Enquiry against the accused Balwinder Singh @ Bittu, Mitan @ Dimpy and Soni Lal is still sub judiced with Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Bholath. 5. A short reply dated 9.12.2014 by way of affidavit of Mukesh Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of police, Police Sub Division Bholath, District Kapurthala, Punjab-respondent No. 1 has been filed. As per the CT Scan Report (Annexure R-1/1) submitted by S.G.L. Charitable Hospital, Kapurthala, the injury No. 6 is described as, "Urinary bladder is collapsed. Foleys' bulb is seen in situ". Opinion of Dr. Ruhi Karwal, DMRD, DNB (Teleradiology) (Annexure R-1/2) is as under: * Free fluid in pelvis with pelvic fat stranding. As per the CT Scan Report (Annexure R-1/1) submitted by S.G.L. Charitable Hospital, Kapurthala, the injury No. 6 is described as, "Urinary bladder is collapsed. Foleys' bulb is seen in situ". Opinion of Dr. Ruhi Karwal, DMRD, DNB (Teleradiology) (Annexure R-1/2) is as under: * Free fluid in pelvis with pelvic fat stranding. No obvious active leak of contrast is seen. However, in view of clinical history of hematuria, possibility of urinary bladder injury to be considered. * Fracture public symphsis and sacrum as detailed." 6. After going through the opinion given by the doctor, it is made out that there was an injury in the urinary bladder and fracture on the public symphsis. 7. At this stage, reference can be made to a supreme Court judgment in the case of Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2014 (2) R.C.R. (Crl.) 482. In paragraph 31 sub clause VII, the Supreme Court has observed as under: 31. (I) to (VI) ................. (VII) While deciding whether to exercise it's power under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and even the chargesheet has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers favorably, but after prima facie assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above. On the other hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost complete or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at the stage of argument normally the High Court should refrain from exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code, as in such cases the trial Court would be in a position to decide the case finally on merits and to come a conclusion as to whether the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is committed or not. Similarly, in those cases where the conviction is already recorded by the trial Court and the matter is at the appellate stage before the High Court, mere compromise between the parties would not be a ground to accept the same resulting in acquittal of the offender who has already been convicted by the trial Court. Her charge is proved under Section 307 I.P.C. and conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty of such a crime. 8. In Narinder Singh's case (supra) it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court that evidence in the said case was yet to be led in Court, and therefore, chances of conviction were remote and it was unnecessary to drag the criminal proceedings. Criminal proceedings were quashed after accepting the compromise. In the present case, after framing of charges, parties have entered into an amicable settlement as is evident from the status report. As per the opinion of the doctor, the injury was not dangerous to life. In view of the status report, the compromise is being accepted. Present petition is allowed. F.I.R. No. 121 dated 25.12.2013 registered under Sections 307, 427, 148, 149 I.P.C. at Police station Begowal District Kapurthala is hereby quashed qua the petitioner only.