Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19318 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10611 of 2024 Applicant :- Tinku @ Tekchand And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Punya Sheel Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sandeep Kumar Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Akash Kumar Sharma holding brief of Sri Punya Sheel Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri B.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. Sri Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the private respondent is not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list. 3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceedings originated from the summoning order dated 21.01.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Mathura in Complaint Case No. 55697 of 2023, Savita v. Tinku and others, under Sections 323, 498-A, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Magorra, District Mathura and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application. 4. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 6.6.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably. The dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature. 5. As per the office report dated 11.11.2024, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record. 6. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 27.9.2024, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them and further they have decided to live separately and in this regard they have filed a petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court concerned and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them. 7. From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7 (c) of the said mediation report. 8. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition. 9. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed. 10. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant(s). 11. The present application is allowed. 12. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case as well as cognizance order passed in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 10.2.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad