Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:136615 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34355 of 2024 Applicant :- Anuj Alias Yuvraj And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sanjay,G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sanjay, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 22639 of 2019 (Sucheta Vs. Anuj @ Yuvraj), arising out of Case Crime No. 027 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) F.T.C., Court No. 1, (Crime Against Women), Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties, which is at page no. 115 of the paper book. 4. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that opposite party no. 2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has relied upon para nos. 7 and 8 of the counter affidavit, which is quoted herein below:- "7. That the contents made in the paragraph no. 13 of the affidavit of criminal misc. application is correct. It is submitted that opposite party no. 2 has also received the demand draft No. 110773 dated 29.04.2024 amount about Rs. 4,75,000/-. 8. That the contents made in the paragraph no. 14 of the affidavit of criminal misc. application is also correct opposite party no. 2 and applicants also filed a joint compromise deed before the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), F.T.C., Court No. 1, Ghaziabad in Criminal Case No. 22639 of 2019, Case Crime No. 027 of 2019 (State of U.P. Vs. Anuj @ Yuvraj and Others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad for quashing the Criminal Proceeding purpose of present case who has been also mentioned in order sheet dated 13.08.2024." 5. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings. 6. Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants being the close relatives, have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed. 7. It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end. 8. In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 13.08.2024, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 9. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed. 10. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 SK Srivastava Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad