Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24905 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4108 of 2025 Applicant :- Prince Tyagi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Mr. Satish Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 3185 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2016, under sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C-I, Ghaziabad, on the basis of compromise. 3. Earlier the applicants by means of application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 34950 of 2024 have moved before this Court, wherein this Court, vide order dated 2.12.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the court concerned along with application for verification of the compromise deed as well as a certified copy of this order. 4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise has been verified by the concerned court, vide order dated 3.1.2025, certified copy of the order is annexed as Annexure-2 of the application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court. 6. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 7. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court: (i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675, (ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677, (iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1, (iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303, (v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466, 8. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute. 10. Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No. 3185 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2016, under sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C-I, Ghaziabad, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed. 11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Faridul Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad