ORDER : 1. This petition is filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings. 2. The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 1035 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class-I, Perinthalmanna. In the aforesaid case, he faces indictment under Sections 509 and 294(b) of the IPC. 3. The prosecution allegation is that on 14.7.2015 at about 4 p.m. the petitioner abused the 2nd respondent and uttered words with intent to outrage her modesty. 4. Heard the submissions advanced. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that at the instance of the wife of the petitioner, a crime was registered as Crime No. 946 of 2015 of Perinthamanna Police Station against the 2nd respondent and others. It is also submitted referring to Annexure A2 affidavit that the disputes have been settled amicably. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed her reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioner. 7. The position with regard to quashing of proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties is by now well settled. In Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows: "61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above questions is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings." 8. The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , the pertinent observations which are as under: xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice. (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 9. The offence committed by the petitioner cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society. It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. 10. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure- A1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as C.C. No. 1035 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class-I, Perinthalmanna are quashed.