Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103063 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22359 of 2025 Applicant :- Shavez And 6 Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kushwaha,Rakesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.122/2024 (State vs. Shavez and others) under Section 498A, 323, 354 1.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District-Rampur arising out of Case Crime No.73 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Fast Track Court (C.A.W.), Rampur and quash the impugned charge sheet dated 26.01.2024 (Charge Sheet No * 0.05 / 2024 ) and also quash the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 19.02.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), C.A.W., Rampur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 19.2.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 5.5.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided. 4. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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 compromise dated 19.2.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 8. 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. 9. The present application under Section 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 D. Tamang Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad