Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115702 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12088 of 2024 Applicant :- Shitansh Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anirudh Upadhyay,G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashish Mishra, advocate holding brief of Sri Anirudh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 437 of 2018, State versus Shitansh Srivastava, arising out of Case Crime No. 535 of 2015, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station George Town, District Allahabad (Prayagraj), pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Allahabad (Prayagraj), as well as, FIR dated 07.11.2015, charge-sheet dated 01.03.2016 and cognizance order dated 08.02.2018. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on mutual consent of the parties 13(B) application of the applicant has been decided vide order dated 16.03.2022, which is at page-55 of the paper-book. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the matter has been settled between the parties and the present criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submits that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings against the applicant are quashed. 5. Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid stated by learned counsel for the applicant. 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 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, being the close relatives, 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 16.02.2021 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. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 S.Prakash Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad