HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34935 of 2025 Court No. - 78 HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S has been filed seeking the following relief: "अतः माननीय न्यायालय से सिवनम्र िनवेदन है न्यायालय न्याियक मिजस्ट्रेट, कोटर् संख्या 3. अलीगढ़ के समक्ष लिम्बत वाद संख्या 678 वषर् 2013 राज्य बनाम नीरज शमार् आिद अन्तगर्त धारा 498ए, 323, 504, 506 भारतीय दण्ड संिहता एवं 3/4 दहेज प्रितषेध अिधिनयम, थाना सासनी गेट, जनपद अलीगढ़, मुकदमा अपराध संख्या 182 वषर् 2013 वाद में हुये समझौते के आधार पर वाद की समस्त कायर्वाही िनरस्त / रद्द करने की महती कृ पा करें। माननीय न्यायालय से यह भी सिवनम्र िनवेदन है िक वतर्मान आवेदनपत्र के लम्बन अविध तक वाद संख्या 678 वषर् 2013 राज्य बनाम नीरज शमार् आिद अन्तगर्त धारा 498ए, 323, 504, 506 भारतीय दण्ड संिहता एवं 3/4 दहेज प्रितषेध अिधिनयम, थाना सासनी गेट, जनपद अलीगढ़, जो न्यायालय न्याियक मिजस्ट्रेट, कोटर् संख्या 3, अलीगढ़ के समक्ष लिम्बत है, की अिग्रम कायर्वाही स्थिगत रखने व करने की महती कृ पा करें। माननीय न्यायालय के दृिष्ट में अन्य कोई न्यायोिचत, यथासम्भव आदेश/िनदेर्श, उपषम/अनुतोष आवेदकगण के पक्ष में पािरत / प्रदान करने की महती कृ पा करें।" It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the parties have entered into compromise dated 03.10.2024 annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the present application and the same has been duly verified by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Aligarh. Learned counsel for the parties do not propose to file the counter and rejoinder affidavits. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the present dispute arises Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Neeraj Sharma And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) out of matrimonial discord between the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no.2. The present criminal case has been lodged against the applicant no.1 (husband) and his family members by the opposite party no.2 owing to misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged wherein chances of an ultimate conviction are bleak and no useful purpose is likely to be served by allouring a criminal prosecution to continue, the Court may while taking into consideration the special facts of a case, quash the proceedings. Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties. In the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675, it has been held that "The High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C." Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Constitutional Bench Judgment in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012)10 SCC 303, has held that "But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim." Both the parties have agreed to withdraw the proceedings pending amongst them in various Courts. From perusal of the records and the law as cited above, the present case is a good case for exercise of power by the Court to quash the entire proceedings, as well as the charge-sheet. The dispute appears to be purely of a personal nature being a matrimonial discord that has been mutually settled between the parties, to their entire NA528 No. 34935 of 2025 2 satisfaction, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any longer. The present application for quashing filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. comes within the parameters as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, Criminal Appeal No. 3831 of 2025, SLP (Crl.) No. 11642 of 2019 dated 02.09.2025. In view of above, the proceedings of Case No. 678 of 2013 (State vs. Neeraj Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 182 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Shasni Gate, District Aligarh, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Aligarh, Police Station Shasni Gate, District Aligarh, are hereby quashed. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed. September 12, 2025 Puspendra NA528 No. 34935 of 2025 3 (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad