JUDGMENT : B.K. Patel, J. - This application u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. has been filed for quashing the proceedings in G.R. No. 228 of 2008 pending the Court of Learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as Learned Counsel for Opposite Party No. 1 the State and Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 are present. 2. Heard. 3. It appears that though F.I.R. was lodged for commission of alleged offences under Sections 366.244 and 506 read with 34 I.P.C. However, charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken for commission of offence u/s 366-A I.P.C. The Petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2 filed affidavits before this Court today. The Petitioner in the affidavit has stated that the Opposite Party No. 2 left her paternal home on her own sweet will and they got married at Bag Devi Temple, Bhanjanagar and thereafter the marriage has been registered by the District Marriage Officer, Nayagarh. A marriage certificate dated 18.09.2008 has been issued to that effect. The Opposite Party No. 2-victim in her affidavit has stated that she had left her paternal house on her own will; married with the Petitioner at Bagdevi Temple Bhanjangar, out of their wedlock a girl child was born on 5.3.2009; now they are living happy conjugal life and she has no objection if the criminal proceeding against the Petitioner is quashed. Petitioner and Opposite Party No. 2 also personally appear in Court and support the averments made in the affidavits. It is also contended by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2 that, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, continuance of the proceeding shall amount to abuse of process of Court. 4. As the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably and the informant-victim does not want to proceed with he case, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the proceeding to continue any further. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case and the principles indicated in the authoritative judicial pronouncements in the cases of (2000) 10 SCC 10 in the case of Fazle Gaffar Khan and Ors. v. State of W.B. and Anr.,; Betu alias Bijan Kumar Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and Another, ; Liaquat Hussen Khan and Anr. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case and the principles indicated in the authoritative judicial pronouncements in the cases of (2000) 10 SCC 10 in the case of Fazle Gaffar Khan and Ors. v. State of W.B. and Anr.,; Betu alias Bijan Kumar Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and Another, ; Liaquat Hussen Khan and Anr. v. State of Orissa (2001) 21 OCR 437 ; Ajay Kumar Das v. State of Orissa and Two Ors. (2005) 31 OCR 339 ; Ashwini Kumar Behera v. State of Orissa (2007) 36 OCR 373 ; and Hemanta Kumar Rout v. State of Orissa (2007) 37 OCR 698, it is found that the ends of justice and equity will be best served if the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 228 of 2008 is quashed. 5. Accordingly, in order to secure the ends of justice, allow the application, proceeding in G.R. Case No. 228 of 2008 is quashed. 6. The CRLMC is dispose of. 7. Urgent certified copy of the order be granted on proper application. 8. CRLMC disposed of. Final Result : Allowed