As per case facts, the petitioner, Talif, was accused by Jameel of molesting his 13-year-old daughter, Neha, on November 9, 2018. Neha's statement under Section 164 CrPC confirmed that Talif ... grabbed her hand and molested her. A chargesheet was filed under Section 354 IPC and Sections 7/8 of the POCSO Act. Later, the victim's father and the accused reached a mutual compromise, claiming the dispute was personal and they did not wish to pursue the matter further. The question arose whether quashing the criminal proceedings for these non-compoundable offenses under Section 482 CrPC, based on a mutual compromise and considering the victim's minor status, would be justified and in the interest of justice. Finally, the Supreme Court, referencing precedents like State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must be used sparingly and not mechanically, especially for serious offenses like those under the POCSO Act, which are not private but impact society. It highlighted that compromises in such cases, particularly when the victim is a minor and the compromise is made by the guardian, are a negative aspect and do not make the chances of conviction remote or dim. The court concluded that quashing criminal proceedings for these offenses based on compromise is not justified and not in the interest of justice, as POCSO offenses are grave, non-compoundable, and aimed at protecting children's welfare.