HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8640 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Vartik Raj Srivastava, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 2 is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2. 3. The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 25.08.2023 as well as summoning order dated 12.09.2024 passed in Case No. 54595 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 370 of 2023, under Sections 323, 342, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Madiaon, District Lucknow and its entire proceedings. 4. Applicant no. 1 (husband) and respondent no. 2 (wife) are also present before this Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that marriage of applicant no. 1 was solemnized with private respondent no. 2 on 08.10.2016 and they were enjoying their matrimonial life. They also have two children out of their wedlock. However, later on, due to some misunderstanding, F.I.R. was lodged. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, compromise duly signed by both the parties was placed before the Investigating Officer, but without considering the same, charge sheet was submitted by him Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Desh Deepak Singh, Pradeep Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan Vishwakarma And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) in mechanical manner. It is also submitted that now applicant no. 1 and respondent no. 2 are enjoying their matrimonial life and respondent no. 2 does not want to prosecute the applicant no. 1 (husband) or applicant no. 2 (her father-in-law). It is, thus, submitted that the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicants, but does not dispute the facts that the genesis of the prosecution in question is matrimonial dispute. 7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 also concedes the fact that as the matter has been settled in between the parties, respondent no. 2 does not want prosecute the applicants. 8. Respondent no. 2-Archana Vishwkarma, who is present before this Court, states that the issue has been resolved during the course of investigation, but the same was not considered by the Investigating Officer. She also states that presently she is living with her husband and in-laws along with her children and she does not want to prosecute the applicants. Respondent no. 2 categorically states that she has no objection, in case, the impugned proceedings are quashed. 9. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and going through the contents of the F.I.R., application, settlement agreement dated 24.01.2024 executed in between the parties as well as other relevant documents including the statement of respondent no. 2 given before this Court, it is evident that the issue has been resolved in between the parties and both the parties are residing jointly. It is also evident that respondent no. 2 does not want to prosecute the applicants. In view of above, this Court is of the view that the trial of the case in question would be futile one. 10. In such circumstances, charge sheet dated 25.08.2023 as well as summoning order dated 12.09.2024 passed in Case No. 54595 A482 No. 8640 of 2025 2 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 370 of 2023, under Sections 323, 342, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Madiaon, District Lucknow and its entire proceedingsare hereby quashed. 11. The application stands allowed. 12. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned, forthwith. October 10, 2025 VKS A482 No. 8640 of 2025 3 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench