Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:146041 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42203 of 2024 Applicant :- Danish Ansari And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nehal Beg Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 24.09.2021, Cognizance/Summoning order dated 19.02.2022 and entire proceeding of Case No. 8839 of 2022 (State Vs. Danish Ansari and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2021, under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., section 3/4 of D.P. Act, and section 4 of Muslim Mahila (Vivah Par Adhikaro Ki Suraksha) Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) Court No.7 Kanpur Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the settlement agreement has already been entered between the parties before the Mediation Centre of this Court on 08.06.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided. 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. 5. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre of this Court. 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 have settled the dispute 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 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 settlement agreement dated 08.06.2025, 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 is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 S.Prakash Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad