Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130886-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10921 of 2022 Petitioner :- Rahul And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Sadab Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,A/D0274/12,Dheeraj Kumar Dwivedi Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State, Shri Aquil Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and perused the records. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 14.7.2022, giving rise to Case Crime No. 28 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354A, 376 IPC and Sections-3/4 of D. P. Act, Police Station Rawatpur, District Kanpur Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that on account of matrimonial discord between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 3, who are husband and wife, the impugned FIR was lodged. However, subsequently, both the parties appeared before the District Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Kanpur Nagar and with the help of the mediators, the dispute between the parties has been resolved and a settlement agreement dated 1.6.2024 has been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure SA 1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of petitioners. 4. He has next submitted that while resolving the said dispute, it was agreed between the parties that a sum of 4,50,000/- shall be paid by the petitioner no. 1 to respondent no. 3 in lieu of all her claims and dues. He has further submitted that pursuant to the said settlement agreement a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- has already been paid to respondent no. 3 vide Demand Draft No. 380567, dated 24.5.2024. It is also submitted that the balance amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- is being paid to respondent no. 3, who is present in Court today, through Demand draft No. 880674, dated 23.7.2025, which has been drawn in the name of respondent no. 3, Rinki, a photostat copy of which, has been taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties, the impugned first information report be quashed. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no. 3, has also appeared and has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 3, in paragraph 8 of which, it has been categorically stated that a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as agreed between the parties, has already been received by respondent no. 3. The balance amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- has been received today by respondent no. 3, who is present in the Court vide Demand draft No. 880674, dated 23.7.2025. Receipt of Rs. 2,50,000/-, vide Demand draft No. 880674, dated 23.7.2025, has been acknowledged by respondent no. 3. It has further been submitted that now pursuant to the said agreement the entire amount in lieu of all her claims and dues has been paid to her and now nothing remains to be paid. In para 9 of the short counter affidavit it is stated that respondent no. 3 has no objection, if the impugned first information report is quashed. 7. Learned AGA also does not dispute the aforesaid fact. 8. This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi Versus State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, ( 2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. 9. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and Another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case. 11. Accordingly, the impugned first information report dated first information report dated dated 14.7.2022, giving rise to Case Crime No. 28 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354A, 376 IPC and Sections-3/4 of D. P. Act, Police Station Rawatpur, District Kanpur Nagar as well as all consequential proceedings, if any, are hereby quashed. 12. The instant writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 HR Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad