HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 47917 of 2019 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Sri Krishna Madhav Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Meraj Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, 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 impugned charge sheet No.118/19 dated 2.6.2019 and cognizance order dated 5.10.2019 as well as proceeding of Criminal Case No.8957 of 2019 (State Vs. Asha Ram and others) arising out of Case Crime No.446 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Bilari, District Moradabad. 3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that divorce decree order by mutual consent has been passed by court below on 28.10.2022, copy of which has been filed at page 13 of the supplementary affidavit and in view of the divorce decree, 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. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Meraj Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ved Prakash Mishra Satveer And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 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 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 divorce decree order dated 28.10.2022, 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. October 14, 2025 D. Tamang A482 No. 47917 of 2019 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad