JUDGMENT : By way of this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner is seeking quashing of judgment dated 08.09.2020/25.09.2020, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Indora, District Kangra, H.P., in Criminal Case No.51II/2012, titled as State of H.P. Versus Smt. Parvesh Rani, as also the consequential orders in the appeal which have been filed by the present petitioner against the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court before the learned Appellate Court, on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the accused and the complainant. 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR stood registered at the behest of private respondent which led to initiation of the trial against the petitioner by way of Criminal Case No.51II/2012, details whereof have been given hereinabove and the petitioner herein was convicted for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment of conviction is under challenge before the learned Appellate Court. He has submitted that the issue which led to the registration of FIR has now been amicably settled between the petitioner and respondent No.2 and in terms of the settlement so arrived at between them, the judgment of conviction so passed against the petitioner be quashed and set aside. To demonstrate the fact of settlement between the parties, learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to an affidavit of respondent No.2 appended with this petition as Annexure P2, perusal whereof demonstrates that the complainant expressed therein her intention of the petitioner being acquitted. 3. Ms. Komal Chaudhary, learned counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2, has submitted that taking into consideration the facts involved in the case which led to the registration of the FIR which resulted in the ensuing criminal proceedings and the conviction of the petitioner, respondent No.2 has in fact taken a conscious decision to make a request to this Court to set aside the judgment of conviction so passed against the petitioner. She has also handed over a certificate issued by Dr. R. Gupta, dated 15.03.2022 of Guri Kripa Hospital, G.T. Road, Purana Bhangala (Hoshiarpur), Punjab, in terms whereof on account of the medical problems from which respondent No.2 is suffering, she has been advised complete bed rest of ten to twelve weeks. She has also handed over a certificate issued by Dr. R. Gupta, dated 15.03.2022 of Guri Kripa Hospital, G.T. Road, Purana Bhangala (Hoshiarpur), Punjab, in terms whereof on account of the medical problems from which respondent No.2 is suffering, she has been advised complete bed rest of ten to twelve weeks. This certificate is ordered to be taken on record. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith, this Court is of the considered view that in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012, titled as Ramgopal & Anr. Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh, decided on 29.09.2021, this is a fit case wherein this Court should invoke its inherent powers so vested upon it under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and set aside the judgment of conviction passed against the petitioner by the learned Trial Court. 5. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Ramgopal & Anr. Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh’s case (supra) has held that the criminal proceedings involving non heinous offences or where the offences are perdominantly of private nature, can be annulled irrespective of the fact that trial has been concluded or appeal stands dismissed against the conviction. Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to hold that handing out punishment is not the sole form of delivering justice. Societal method of applying laws even is always subject to lawful exceptions and it goes without saying that the cases where compromise is struck post-conviction, the High Court ought to exercise such discretion with rectitude keeping in view the circumstances surrounding the incident etc. 6. Coming to the facts of this case, herein the allegations of the complainant against the petitioner were that the petitioner had obtained the job of Anganbari Worker by furnishing false affidavit and forged documents with regard to annual income of family of the accused. The FIR so registered at the best of respondent No.2, i.e. FIR No.288/10, lodged at Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., under Section 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, resulted in the criminal trial which led to the conviction of the accused. The judgment of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court is under challenge in the appeal. 7. The judgment of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court is under challenge in the appeal. 7. This Court is of the considered view that taking into consideration the circumstances surrounding the incident and the manner in which the compromise has been arrived at between the parties as also the nature and seriousness of the offence, this petition deserves to be allowed, more so for the reason that the complainant herself has given her consent to this effect. 8. Accordingly, in view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is allowed and judgment dated 08.09.2020/25.09.2020, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Indora, District Kangra, H.P., in Criminal Case No.51II/2012, titled as State of H.P. Versus Smt. Parvesh Rani, as also the consequential orders, vide which the petitioner was convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, is set aside and FIR No.288/10, dated 26.08.2010, lodged at Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., under Section 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, which lead to the initiation of the trial is also ordered to be quashed and set aside. 9. In view of the setting aside of the judgment of conviction, its natural corollary is that the appeal which has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction has now been rendered infructuous and the learned Appellate Court is directed to close the same by placing on record a copy of the order so passed by the Court today in the present proceedings. Pending miscellaneously applications, if any, stand disposed of.