JUDGMENT Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. - Petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR No. 112 dated 23.12.2012 under Sections 324, 323,342,506,148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Dorangla, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur (Annexure P1) alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 12.5.2017 (Annexure P2) . 2. Vide order dated 18.5.2017, a direction was given to the trial Court to record the statements of the parties and submit a report regarding the genuineness of the compromise effected between the parties and also to intimate whether any accused is declared as proclaimed offender. 3. In pursuance thereof, the trial Court has submitted a report on 12.6.2017 (forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur on 14.6.2017), after recording the statements of the parties. The trial Court has submitted that the accused- Sukhdev Singh @ Sukha, Sulakhan Singh, Gurwinder Singh @ Ginder, Harcharan Singh @ Channa have appeared along with their respective counsel, who had identified them and got their statements recorded acknowledging that the compromise had been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or any undue influence. It was also submitted by the trial Court that complainant-Bakshish Singh has got recorded separate statement that his grandson,namely, Satinder Singh, son of Jaspal Singh, has been living in Austraila since 16.2.2017 and he will not visit India for 4/5 years in future and his statement could not be recorded as he is residing out of the Country. 4. Vide order dated 23.8.2017, this case was adjourned for want of an appropriate affidavit of the said Satinder Singh-injured victim. In this regard, affidavit, dated 20.9.2017 (Annexure P-3) is filed by Satinder Singh, son of Jaspal Singh, resident of village Magar Mudian Tehsil and District Gurdaspur stating that he has compromised the matter with accused with my own will and without any pressure and coercion. 5. Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code. 5. Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code. Keeping in view authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in " Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and another , (2012) 4 RCR(Criminal) 543 "and in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings are put to an end. 6. As per the Full Bench judgement of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab , (2007) 3 RCR(Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. 7. The Apex Court in Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Sadhu Ram Singla and Others , (2017) 5 SCC 3500 has held as under:- "Having carefully considered the singular facts and circumstances of the present case, and also the law relating to the continuance of criminal cases where the complainant and the accused had settled their differences and had arrived at an amicable arrangement, we see no reason to differ with the view taken in Manoj Sharma's case and several decisions of this Court delivered thereafter with respect to the doctrine of judicial restraint. In concluding hereinabove, we are not unmindful of the view recorded in the decisions cited at the Bar that depending on the attendant facts, continuance of the criminal proceedings, after a compromise has been arrived at between the complainant and the accused, would amount to abuse of process of Court and an exercise in futility since the trial would be prolonged and ultimately, it may end in a decision which may be of no consequence to any of the parties." 8. Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. 9. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 112 dated 23.12.2012 under Sections 324, 323,342,506,148 and 149 IPC registered at Police Station Dorangla, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur (Annexure P1) and all the consequential proceedings, arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed subject to payment of costs in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited in the Office of District Legal Services Authority,Gurdaspur within 8 weeks from today, failing which this order shall stand recalled automatically without reference to the Court.