JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - The instant petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ''CrPC'') has been filed by petitioneraccused, for quashing of FIR No. 110 of 2015, dated 11th May, 2015, under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ''IPC'') and under Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as ''M.V.Act), registered at Police Station Boileauganj, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., and criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance thereto, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P2), arrived at between petitioneraccused and complainant-respondent No. 2. 2. Respondents No. 2- complainant, Shri Vivek Chandel, present in person in Court, duly identified by counsel, endorses compromise, Annexure P2 and in his statement, recorded on oath in this Court, has not only reiterated signing of the compromise by him with petitioner- accused with free consent and will, without any coercion and pressure, but, also deposed to the effect that the car driven by the petitioner had hit his motor cycle and in that accident, he had not received any injury. However, there was loss caused to his motor cycle. Now, the petitioner has repentance with his act and has apologized for that and it is stated by him that the accident had caused due to error of judgment and had he been more vigilant, the accident could have been avoided. Therefore, complainant/respondent No.2 has compromised the matter with the petitioner and he does not intend to continue the proceedings in pursuance to the FIR lodged by him. He prays for compounding of the case. 3. It is contended on behalf of respondent No. 1- State that accused is not entitled to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court to exercise its power on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties with respect to an offence not compoundable under Section 320 Cr.PC. 4. It is apt to record herein that a three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. 4. It is apt to record herein that a three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. , (2012) 10 SCC 303 , explaining that High Court has inherent power under Section 482 CrPC with no statutory limitation including Section 320 CrPC, has held that these powers are to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court and these powers can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings or complaint or FIR in appropriate cases where offender and victim have settled their dispute and for that purpose no definite category of offence can be prescribed. However, it is also observed that Courts must have due regard to nature and gravity of the crime and criminal proceedings in heinous and serious offences or offence like murder, rape and dacoity etc. should not be quashed despite victim or victim family have settled the dispute with offender. Jurisdiction vested in High Court under Section 482 CrPC is held to be exercisable for quashing criminal proceedings in cases having overwhelming and predominatingly civil flavour particularly offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil partnership, or such like transactions, or even offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc., family disputes or other such disputes where wrong is basically private or personal nature where parties mutually resolve their dispute amicably. It was also held that no category or cases for this purpose could be prescribed and each case has to be dealt with on its own merit but it is also clarified that this power does not extend to crimes against society. 5. The Apex Court, in case Narinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. , (2014) 6 SCC 466 , has summed up and laid down principles, by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with criminal proceedings. 6. No doubt Sections 279 and 337 IPC are non- compoundable under Section 320 CrPC. 6. No doubt Sections 279 and 337 IPC are non- compoundable under Section 320 CrPC. However, as explained by Hon''ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh''s and Narinder Singh''s cases (supra), power of High Court under Section 482 CrPC is not inhibited by the provisions of Section 320 CrPC and FIR as well as criminal proceedings can be quashed by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, it was warranted in given facts and circumstances of the case for ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court, even in those cases which are not compoundable where parties have settled the matter between themselves. 7. In present case, complainant has appeared in person in the Court and has endorsed the compromise filed with petition duly signed by him and accused with free consent and will, without any coercion. He has categorically stated that there might have been error of judgment and he is not interested to continue with criminal proceedings against accused. 8. Offence in question does not fall in the category of offences termed to be prohibited, in the pronouncements of Apex Court, to be compounded exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC. In view of statement of respondent No. 2 complainant, recorded on oath in this Court, probability of conviction is also too remote. 9. Considering facts and circumstances of the case in entirety, I am of the opinion that present petition deserves to be allowed for ends of justice and the same is allowed accordingly and FIR No. 110 of 2015, dated 11th May, 2015, under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, registered at Police Station Boileauganj, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., is quashed. Consequent to quashing of FIR, criminal Case No. 6-2 of 17/15, titled State of H.P. versus Amarjeet Singh, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, H.P. also stands quashed. 10. Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.