Raj Mani Chauhan,J.:- Petitioner No.1 Noorul Ain and opposite party No. 3 Parveen Bano are present in person before this Court today who are identified by their counsel and state that they have settled their dispute on persuasion of their well wishers. At present, they are living peacefully and happily together as husband and wife. Learned counsel for the petitioners files supplementary affidavit which is taken on record. Sri Shamsher, Advocate files Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.3, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 as well as perused the documents available on record. This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the impugned charge sheet No. 21 of 2006 dated 28.07.2006 submitted by the Investigating Officer in Case Crime No. 145 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 506 I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jaitpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the opposite party No.3 Parveen Bano and petitioner No.1 Noorul Ain are wife and husband. The relations between them were strained. Opposite party No.3 left the house of her husband and started to live in her maika. In the meantime, she filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance against the petitioner No.1. She also lodged the FIR against the petitioners in which Investigating Officer after investigation of the case submitted charge sheet against the petitioners under Sections 498-A, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of petition under Section 125 of the Code the relations became cordial between the opposite party No. 3 and petitioner No.1. Consequently, they filed compromise in criminal proceeding arising out of petition under Section 125 of the Code on 16.06.2007 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, who disposed of the same vide order dated 18.07.2007. Since then both of them i.e. petitioner No.1 and opposite party No.3 are living together as husband and wife. Now there is no dispute of any kind among them who have been reunited and are living together. It will be futile exercise to proceed with the criminal case arising out of the impugned charge sheet. Since then both of them i.e. petitioner No.1 and opposite party No.3 are living together as husband and wife. Now there is no dispute of any kind among them who have been reunited and are living together. It will be futile exercise to proceed with the criminal case arising out of the impugned charge sheet. Therefore the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer as well as the criminal proceedings arising out of the aforesaid charge sheet is liable to be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675 . Learned A.G.A. has no objection. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3. Since the petitioner No.1 and opposite party No.3 have settled their dispute and are living happily together as husband and wife. Now it will be futile exercise to permit the criminal proceeding pending against the accused petitioners to continue. Keeping in view the healthy and cordial relation among them, the impugned charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer as well as the proceeding of criminal case arising out of the aforesaid charge sheet may be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case cited above. The petition is, therefore, allowed and the impugned charge sheet No. 21 of 2006 dated 28.07.2006 submitted by the Investigating Officer in Case Crime No. 145 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 506 I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jaitpur, District Ambedkar Nagar as well as the proceeding of criminal case arising out of the aforesaid charge sheet is quashed.