The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of encouraging genuine settlements in matrimonial disputes and the aim of law to maintain peace and harmony in society, especially in the context of matrimonial offences.

JUDGMENT

1. In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondent jointly prays for closure of case on count of compromise between the parties in matrimonial offence after the appeal against conviction has been dismissed vide order dated 15.07.2021.

3. Counsel for the parties have relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court passed in Pramod & Anr. v. State of UP & Anr., in application under Section 482 Cr. P.C., 12174 of 2020, decided on 23.02.2021, relevant portion whereof reads as follows :-

"42. This Court is of the considered opinion that the aim and object of law is not only to punish the culprit, but, the objective of the law is also to maintain peace, tranquility, prosperity and harmony in society as well as in the country. If there is a compromise between husband and wife and they are living to live together and to lead happy family life, then it will also be ideal in building our society. Marriage is a sacred ceremony of our society, the main objective of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions, resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counseled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their "young" days in chasing their "cases" in different courts.

43. In the facts of the present case, the marriage of the applicant no. 1 was solemnized with opposite party no. 2 but after some time of their marriage, the relations between the two became strained and incompatible resulting in initiation of present criminal proceedings by opposite party no. 2 against the applicants, under Sections498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C., as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act. Thereafter, the applicants have been convicted for an offence under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. as also under Section 4 D.P. Act by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Ghaziabad vide order dated 02.12.2017. Against the said order of conviction, applicants filed an appeal in which they have been enlarged on bail. During the pendency of the appeal, after settling their all the disputes, they have arrived at a compromise and now they are living happily as husband and wife under the same roof, and enjoying their happy family life with their son. If this Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., does not quash the criminal proceedings as well as the order of conviction, then the happy life of husband i.e. applicant no. 1 and wife (opposite party no. 2) will be ruined, especially the happy future life of son of applicant no. 1 and opposite party no. 2, who has not seen anything yet and whose golden future remains yet to commence and who will suffer a lot.

44. Thus, with regard to third issue, whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings during the pendency of appeal filed against the judgment and order of conviction, this Court is in respectful agreement with the finding recorded by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of Kiran Tulshiram Ingale (Supra), wherein it has been observed that firstly in this case the parties have compromised even after conviction and, the object of compromise is to live happily, peacefully, though separately after divorce. The Sessions Court has taken cognizance of this compromise and has reduced the conviction