HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7493 of 2024 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard. 2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the First Information Report dated 27.08.2024 bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0046 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 328, 406, 494, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Lucknow. 3. This Court vide order dated 24.10.2024 directed the parties to appear before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court for settlement of their dispute through mediation. 4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the parties appeared before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court and the Mediators have submitted its report dated 04.08.2025, which is on record. The report of the Mediators dated 04.08.2025 indicates that the mediation was successfully completed. 5. Learned counsel for opposite party no.4 has also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled through mediation. 6. Learned counsels for both the parties have given undertaking on behalf of the parties that the parties shall abide by all terms and conditions of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Soni Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ram Kumar Singh, Vishwas Shukla Mohit Kohli And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) settlement agreement dated 04.08.2025. 7. The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs. State of Kerala, reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases 343, has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is / are not compoundable within the scope of Section 320 Cr.P.C. even then considering the facts and circumstances of the case in question the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to compound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the issue in question, particularly, the fact that the present petitioner and the private opposite party have settled the dispute through mediation and the report to this effect has been made part of the record, therefore, compelling the prosecution to prosecute the present petitioner would be a futile exercise and in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the FIR bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0261 of 2024 (supra) the proceedings of First Information Report dated 27.08.2024 bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0046 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 328, 406, 494, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Lucknow registered against the petitioners, namely, Mohit Kohli, Rajesh Kohli, Sonia Kohli, Himani Kohli Ahuja and Kawandeep Kaur are hereby quashed. 9. The mediation report dated 04.08.2025 submitted by the Mediators would be the part of this order. 10. Liberty is given to opposite party no.4 to file appropriate application before the competent court of law, if the terms and conditions of aforesaid settlement agreement are flouted. CRLP No. 7493 of 2024 2 11. The petition is, therefore, allowed in terms of compromise entered into between the parties before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre on 04.08.2025. September 19, 2025 Virendra CRLP No. 7493 of 2024 3 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench