As per case facts, a victim's marriage was solemnized, but her in-laws allegedly demanded dowry. On the wedding night, her brother-in-law and husband allegedly committed rape after taunting her for ... dowry. The victim became unconscious, leading to an FIR for rape, dowry demand, and other charges. A charge-sheet was filed. The applicants sought to quash the criminal proceedings, claiming false implication, influenced victim's statement, and an amicable settlement with a compromise deed. The question arose whether criminal proceedings for serious non-compoundable offenses like rape, especially involving aggravated cruelty and not merely a matrimonial dispute, could be quashed based on a post-charge-sheet compromise. Finally, the court found the applicants' precedents inapplicable due to distinguishable facts. It underscored rape as a grave societal offense, not just individual, warning that quashing based on compromise encourages crime, especially if the victim is coerced. The court noted the compromise deed was not part of the official record, precluded its evaluation at this pre-trial stage. Emphasizing that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly for genuine, uncontroverted cases, the court dismissed the application, refusing to quash the criminal proceedings.