JUDGMENT :

SHAMIM AHMED, J.

1. Heard Sri. Onkar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri. Dheeraj Singh (Bohra), learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings in Case No. 14943 of 2020 (Pramod Kumar and Others vs. State) in view of the charge sheet dated 9.9.2020 arising out of case crime no. 29 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 354B, 376, 511 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana District Meerut.

3. In compliance of the order dated 22.7.2021 passed by this Court, applicant no. 1-Pramod Kumar and his son Vipin Kumar has brought two drafts before this Court. The first draft is of Rs. 9,00,000/- dated 24.8.2021 bearing Draft No. 911254 in the name of Tanu Sharma (opposite party no. 2) and the second draft is of Rs. 6,00,000/- dated 24.8.2021 bearing Draft No. 911253 in the name of Tanu Sharma (opposite party no. 2). The total sum of two drafts is Rs. 15,00,000/-. The same has been handed over to opposite party no. 2 Tanu Sharma by the applicants before this Court which was acknowledged by Sri. Dheeraj Singh (Bohra), learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Sri. Arunendra Kumar Singh, learned AGA. The photostat copy of both the drafts is being kept on the record in the file of the case as well as in the file of learned AGA.

4. Opposite party no. 2 Tanu Sharma has stated before the Court that she will withdraw all criminal and civil cases filed against Vipin Kumar, his father Pramod Kumar (applicant no. 1) and his family members pending before any court of law and in future also she will not file any case against them.

5. The same assurance has been given by the father of Tanu Sharma namely Sri. Satya Prakash Sharma.

6. Sri. Pramod Kumar and his son Vipin Kumar have also stated before this Court that from today they will also not file any criminal or civil case against Tanu Sharma and her father Sri. Satya Prakash Sharma or against any family members before any court of law and withdraw all criminal and civil cases filed against Tanu Sharma, Satya Prakash Sharma and other family members in any court of law.

7. Vipin Kumar and Tanu Sharma jointly state before the Court that from today they will live separately and live their independent life and nobody will interfere in any manner in their peaceful life and they will be free to live independently on their own sweet will anywhere they wants.

8. Learned counsel for the parties has drawn the attention of this Court and placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in support of their case:

(i) B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana and Others 2003 (4) ACC 675

(ii) Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2012 (10) SCC 303

(iii) Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory through Administrator, 2013 (11) SCC 697

(iv) Narendra Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and Others, 2014 (6) SCC 466

(v) Yogendra Yadav and Others vs. State of Jharkhand, 2014 (9) SCC 653

9. Summarizing the ratio of all the above cases the latest judgment pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others vs. State of Gujarat and Another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and in paragraph no. 16, the Hon'ble Apex Court has summarized the broad principles with regard to exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the case of compromise/settlement between the parties. Which emerges from precedent of the subjects as follows:-

“(i) Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognizes and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.

(ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the i