HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5918 of 2024 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for State and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in pursuance of charge sheet dated 11.05.2021 as well as cognizance order dated 18.10.2021, passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC (Crime Against Women) Mathura in Criminal Case No.2024/IX/2021, (State versus Anoop Singh), arising out of Case Crime No.31 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Mathura, pending before Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC (Crime Against Women) Mathura. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the present matter arises out of matrimonial dispute. The husband and wife had entered into divorce by mutual consent and decree of divorce has been passed on 04.03.2025. Counsel for applicant further submits that in view of the subsequent degree of divorce, the present criminal proceedings may be quashed. 4. Sri Sarvesh Kumar Singh, holding brief of Sri Garun Pal Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 admits that a degree of divorce has been passed with mutual consent and submits that the criminal proceedings may be quashed and he would have no objection to quash the present criminal proceedings. 5. Learned AGA submits 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 of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Subham, Surjit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Garun Pal Singh Anoop Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 order dated 04.03.2025 passed on application filed under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 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 is, accordingly, allowed. September 4, 2025 I.A.Siddiqui A482 No. 5918 of 2024 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad