HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20430 of 2025 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rahul Kumar Sharma, 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 order dated 19.2.2025 in Complaint Case No.781 of 2023 (Sanju Singh Versus Ajay Singh and others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Hathras, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) F.T.C.-2 Hathras and entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.781 of 2023 (Sanju Singh Versus Ajay Singh and others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act Police Station Mahila Thana, District Hathras, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) F.T.C.-2 Hathras. 3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that parties have entered into settlement through settlement agreement dated 3.9.2025 before the Mediation Centre of this Court and, therefore, the present case be finally decided. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adesh Kumar Dixit, Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rahul Kumar Sharma, Siddharth Ajay Singh And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 and 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 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 settlement NA528 No. 20430 of 2025 2 agreement dated 3.9.2025 before the Mediation Centre of this Court, 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 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed. October 14, 2025 D. Tamang NA528 No. 20430 of 2025 3 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad