HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6283 of 2024 Court No. - 46 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State, Sri Dhananjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, the impugned F.I.R was lodged against the petitioners. However, subsequently, this Court vide order dated 24.04.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, in order to enable the parties to explore the possibility to resolve the dispute through mediation. 3. Pursuant to the said order dated 24.04.2024, the parties appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and with the help of the Mediators, the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and a settlement agreement dated 28.11.2024 has been drawn between the parties, which has been annexed with the record of this petition and shall form part of this order. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties, the impugned F.I.R be quashed. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 has appeared and has acknowledged the said compromise made between the parties and has stated on instructions that in view of the compromise, he has no objection, if the impugned F.I.R is quashed. 6. Learned AGA for the State did not dispute the aforesaid fact. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashwini Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : Dhananjay Kumar Mishra, G.A., Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Shubhanshu Srivastava @ Punit And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of:- (i) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 (ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2008) 9 SCC 677 (iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1 (iv) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (v) Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 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. 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 Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 9. 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 present case. 10. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of impugned F.I.R. dated 24.03.2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 0082 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mariyahun, District Jaunpur, are hereby quashed. 11. The instant writ petition is accordingly allowed. 12. Detag Criminal Misc. Application No.22764 of 2024 from the instant writ petition and list it before the appropriate Bench, if possible, on 24th September, 2025. September 16, 2025 Kushal CRLP No. 6283 of 2024 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- KUSHAL AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad