Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40113 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5650 of 2025 Applicant :- Nadeem Alam And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rashmi Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 is taken on record. 2. Heard Ms. Rashmi Singh, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashok Srivastava, the learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Sushil Yadav, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicants have sought quashing of the charge sheet No. 01/2022 dated 28.03.2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki as well as the summoning order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barabanki along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 737 of 2022, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 4. The applicant no.1 is husband of the opposite party no.2, the F.I.R was lodged because of some matrimonial dispute and the parties have entered into a settlement deed dated 05.06.2025, which has been annexed with the application, in which it has been stated that the parties have resolved their disputes and they have resumed co-habitation. The opposite party no.2 does not want any proceedings to continue against the applicants. 5. Sri Sushil Yadav, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has filed a counter affidavit admitting the factum of compromise and has given her consent for proceedings being quashed on the basis of compromise. 6. Considering the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 7. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the instant application is allowed and the chargesheet dated 28.03.2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki as well as the summoning order dated 19.09.2022 along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 737 of 2022 are hereby quashed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench