HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4364 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by civil judge (J.D.) F.T.C. (offences against women)/Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in Case no. 14210 of 2020 (Smt. Rajkumari Vs. Vinod and others) and order dated 07.02.2026 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.- Second, Mathura District Mathura in Criminal Revision no. 196 of 2025 (Vinod Kumar and another Versus State and another). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 1.7.2026 through mediation before Mediation Centre of this Court, therefore, the present case be finally decided. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner. He further contended that respondent no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the petitioner and the same may be quashed. 5. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement before Mediation Centre of this Court. 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dhruva Dixit Counsel for Respondent(s) : Amarjeet Choudhary, G.A., Gaurav Singh, Pawan Kumar Vinod Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 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 petitioner 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. 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 compromise through mediation before Mediation Centre of this Court dated 1.7.2026, 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 petition is, accordingly, allowed. October 7, 2026 Bhaskar A227 No. 4364 of 2026 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad