The court can quash criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes when the parties have resolved their entire dispute through compromise, considering the nature and gravity of the crime and its impact on society.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

Heard Mr. Monoj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 07.04.2021 filed in Case No.9956 of 2021 arising out of Charge sheet No.01 dated 07.04.2021 filed in Case Crime No.0018 of 2021, under Sections 498-A and 323 of IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Kannauj, as well as stay the proceeding in pursuance of cognizance order dated 02.08.2021 in view of the compromise dated 16.03.2021 executed between both the parties.

3. The brief facts of the case are opposite party No.2 (wife) had lodged an F.I.R. on 02.02.2021 under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act against the applicants (Husband and his family members) alleging that marriage of applicant and opposite party No.2 was solemnized about 6 years before. From the wedlock of applicant No.1 and opposite party No.2, three children were born, who are living with opposite party No.2. The applicants have not satisfied to the dowry and they started beating and harassing her for fulfillment of additional demand of dowry. On 18.01.2021 on the refusal of demand of dowry by the opposite party No.2, applicant beaten her due to which opposite party No.2 has received injuries on her body. The investigating officer after investigation has submitted charge sheet No.1 dated 07.04.2021 before the Court and the cognizance was accordingly taken on 02.08.2021. In the meanwhile, due to intervention of the relatives and well wishers of the family, opposite party No.2 and applicants have entered into compromise on 16.03.2021 outside the Court and started to live together as husband and wife along with their children having no grievance to each other. The applicants have filed present 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash the charge sheet dated 07.04.2021, on the basis of compromise dated 16.03.2021 on 16.02.2022, this Court passed the following order:

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jeetendra Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have entered into a compromise as a subject matter of the dispute was matrimonial. The terms and conditions have been entered into a compromise which is Annexure No. 3.

Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has acknowledged the aforesaid facts.

The parties shall appear before the trial court and file compromise within four weeks. Upon the said compromise being filed before the trial court, it shall after due identification, verify the compromise. The trial Judge shall forward to this Court a duly verified copy of the compromise entered into between the parties along with a copy of his order verifying the compromise which shall be before the next date fixed.

List on 30.03.2022 as fresh.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in Case No. 9956 of 2021 (Case Crime No. 0018 of 2021), under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Kannauj.

Office will ensure the compliance of the aforesaid order and will transmit the copy of the compromise along with copy of the order to the trial court through the concerned Session Judge within three days"

4. In compliance of the order dated 16.2.2022 parties have filed compromise application in the courts below, which has been duly verified and sent to this Court along with verification report dated 30.03.2022, the same is on the record of the case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that proceeding of Criminal case under Sections 498-A,323 IPC and Section ¾ of D.P. Act be quashed as parties to dispute have entered into compromise which have been verified also by courts below. He further submitted that applicant No.1 and opposite party No.2