HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5307 of 2023 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Adil Jamal, counsel for the opposite party no.2. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet No. 461 of 2021, dated 21.10.2021, cognizance order dated 29.8.2022 and entire proceedings in Case No. 14459 of 2022 (State vs. Sagar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 161 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-II, Kanpur Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that:- (i) the dispute arises out of matrimonial discord between the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no. 2. The applicant no.2 is the mother-in-law and applicant no.3 is the father-in-law of opposite party no.2; (ii) the first information came to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged; (iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicants nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred; (iv) there is no injury caused to any party and wholly exaggerated allegations Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shashank Tripathi, Umesh Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhishek Kumar Shukla, Adil Jamal, Aklesh Kumar, G.A. Sagar And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) had been made in the heat of the moment owing to estranged relationship and bruised egos; (v) therefore, in such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the applicants. 4. It is further submitted that the parties have filed a compromise deed before the court concerned. Pursuant to the order dated 24.8.2026 passed by this Court, the parties appeared before the trial court, whereupon the compromise was duly verified by the trial court vide order dated 3.9.2026. Copy of the verification order has been sent to this Court by the court concerned vide letter dated 8.9.2026. 5. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that if the criminal prosecution is allowed to proceed it may create further complication in the otherwise normal relationship that is arising between the hitherto bitterly estranged couple and their families. 6. Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that the opposite party no.2 has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed. 7. In view of the fact that the dispute appears to be purely of a personal nature being a matrimonial dispute that has been mutually settled between the parties, to their satisfaction, no useful purpose would be served in allowing such a prosecution to proceed any further. 8. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675, as well as Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, J.T., 2008 (9) SC 192, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby set aside. 9. The present application is, accordingly, allowed. September 11, 2026 S.S. A482 No. 5307 of 2023 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad