Hon’ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J.—By means of this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’), the applicants (1) Satish Kumar, (2) Shree Pal, (3) Smt. Kamlesh and (4) Smt. Gyanu @ Gyanwati have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashing of the proceedings of criminal case No. 950 of 2007 (State v. Satish Kumar and others) under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of crime No. 527 of 2005, P.S. Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the application under Section 482, Cr.P.C., in brief, are that marriage of applicant No. 1 Satish Kumar and opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kavita took place on 15.4.2001, but subsequently some misunderstanding and disputes were developed between the couple, as a result of which Smt. Kavita lodged an FIR against the applicants at P.S. Vijay Nagar (Ghaziabad), where a case under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act was registered at crime No. 527 of 2005. After investigation, one charge-sheet against the applicant No. 4 Smt. Gyanwati and another charge-sheet against other applicants were submitted, on the basis of which, criminal case No. 2504 of 2006 was registered, which was renumbered as case No. 950 of 2007. An application for granting maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C. was also moved by opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kavita against her husband applicant No. 1 Satish Kumar in case No. 3 of 2007. During the pendency of these cases, due to intervention of some well-wishers and relatives, the parties settled their dispute, in consequence whereof the applicant No. 1 paid Rs. 70,000/- to Smt. Kavita as whole time maintenance and streedhan. After payment of that amount, a compromise was filed by the parties in the proceeding under Section 125, Cr.P.C. On the basis of the compromise and settlement arrived at between the parties, the Addl. Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M., Court No. 3, Ghaziabad vide his order dated 25.9.2008 dismissed the case under Section 125, Cr.P.C. as withdrawn. As a result of the compromise entered into between the parties, the applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceeding of criminal case referred in para 1 above.

3. I have heard arguments of Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Bhaskar Mall, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned AGA for the State of U.P.

4. Drawing my attention towards the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003(46) ACC 779, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, this Court should invoke its inherent jurisdiction to quash the entire proceedings of criminal case No. 950 of 2007 (State v. Satish Kumar and others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of crime No. 527 of 2005, P.S. Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad, as matrimonial dispute has been settled by the parties and with their consent, they have separated themselves and whole time maintenance also been paid to opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kavita in the proceeding under Section 125, Cr.P.C.

5. Opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kavita has filed counter affidavit in this proceeding. In para 9 of the counter affidavit, she has admitted that Rs. 70,000/- have been paid to her by applicant No. 1 as one time maintenance allowance as well as streedhan. In para 12 of the counter affidavit, it is also admitted by Smt. Kavita that all the differences and disputes occurred between the couple have been settled by them and after compromise, she and her husband Satish Kumar are living separately and they are trying to give new shape to their bright future. In para 14 and 15 of the counter affidavit, it is fu