The Supreme Court considered whether criminal proceedings could be quashed after the parties reached a settlement in a case involving non-heinous offences. In The State of Punjab v. Avtar Singh & Ors., the Court upheld the exercise of inherent jurisdiction to bring the proceedings to an end after considering the nature of the dispute and the settlement between the parties. The Court explained that the power under Section 482 CrPC is distinct from the statutory power of compounding offences under Section 320 CrPC. In appropriate circumstances, proceedings involving essentially private or non-heinous disputes may be quashed to secure the ends of justice, even where the matter has progressed substantially. However, the Court reiterated that serious offences such as murder and rape, particularly offences affecting society at large, cannot ordinarily be terminated merely because the victim and accused have entered into a private settlement. The decision discusses compromise, inherent jurisdiction, Section 482 CrPC, Section 320 CrPC and the distinction between private disputes and serious crimes.