JUDGMENT :- Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. Shri. Parihar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives notice on behalf of the respondent no.1 and Shri. P. B. Rathi, learned Counsel waives notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 5. 2. By way of present application, the applicant is seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings registered vide Criminal Case No.455 of 2002. The proceedings have been initiated by the present applicant against the respondent Nos.2 to 5 by a complaint with the Police Station, Ambazari, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 494,495 and 506(B). 3. In the present application, the applicant has stated that the proceedings were initiated on account of some misunderstanding. It is submitted that the applicants have now settled their dispute and are living together. The applicant, therefore, submits that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the aforesaid proceedings. 4. The applicant so also the respondent No.5 are personally present in the Court. They reiterated that the matter has been amicably settled between them. 5. The Apex Court in the case of V.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (reported in 2003 ALL MR (Cri.) 1162 (S.C.) has held that it is the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. The Apex Court has further held that the hyper technical view would be counter productive and would act against interest of women and against the object for which the provision under Section 498-A was introduced. 6. In view of the amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties, I find that no purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings initiated by the present applicant particularly when the present applicant herself is not interested in prosecuting the said proceedings. Therefore, I am inclined to allow the present application. 7. The application is allowed. Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.