JUDGMENT S.S. Saron, J.:- This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.113 dated 27.7.2005 (Annexure-P.1) registered at Police Station Sadar, Ambala for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 Indian Penal Code on the basis of compromise dated 13.5.2010 (Annexure-P.2). 2. Petitioner No.1-Sukhdevinder Singh and respondent No.3- Gurdeep Kaur are husband and wife, who are married to each other. On account of matrimonial dispute various proceedings had been initiated; besides, the impugned FIR (Annexure-P.1) was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of Gurdeep Kaur (respondent No.3). Sukhdevinder Singh (petitioner No.1) had also filed FAO No.M-75 of 2010. In the said FAO on 17.5.2010, this Court observed that the matter had been compromised and in compliance of the compromise a sum of Rs.10,000/- had been paid by the appellant-Sukhdevinder Singh (petitioner No.1) to the respondent (Gurdeep Kaur). The remaining amount was to be paid today i.e. 28.6.2010. It is accepted position by the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.3 that the amount has been paid and received by Gurdeep Kaur respectively. In view of the compromise having been entered into it is prayed that the FIR may be quashed. Gurdeep Kaur (respondent No.3) is present in Court and is identified by her counsel. It is stated by her that she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR; besides, she has made her statement of her free will and desire. 3. In the afore-noticed facts and circumstances, the matrimonial dispute between Sukhdevinder Singh (petitioner No.1) and Gurdeep Kaur (respondent No.3) has been amicably settled and the parties have decided to part ways amicably. In consequence of the settlement the necessary payment has also been made. The effect of withdrawing FAO No.M-75 of 2010, it is submitted, is that the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce passed by the learned District Court at Ambala as the petition filed by respondent No.3 for the grant of divorce stands allowed. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute the State would have no serious objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003 (2) RCR (Cr.) 888. 5. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute the State would have no serious objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003 (2) RCR (Cr.) 888. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (supra) has held that Section 320 Cr.P.C. does not affect or limit the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a FIR in matrimonial disputes. Besides, it is held that where matrimonial dispute has been compromised, the FIR may be quashed. Rather, it was emphasized that there should be an endeavour on the part of the Court to encourage genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes. 6. In the present case, the parties of their own have settled the matrimonial dispute amongst them. They have decided to part ways amicably. In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal prosecution any further. 7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No.113 dated 27.7.2005 (Annexure-P.1) registered at Police Station Sadar, Ambala for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 IPC and all subsequent and consequential proceedings in pursuance thereof shall stand quashed. --------------