JUDGMENT 1. - The police, after investigation, gave a final report in the matter and the respondent No. 2 Saroj has already been married to another person as per the noting on her summon, which was served to her father. 2. The present miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 295/2006 (State v. Kailash & Ors.) pending against the petitioners in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh, district Churu and instituted at the instance of the respondent No. 2 Smt. Saroj for the offence under Section 498-A, I.P.C. 3. The First Information Report in this case was filed by the respondent No. 2 Smt. Saroj against the petitioners. On the basis of the said F.I.R., the charge-sheet was filed and the trial is going on the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh, district Churu. During pendency of the trial, the parties arrived at a compromise and accordingly an application was filed on behalf of the complainant (respondent No. 2) and the petitioners before the trial Court for terminating the proceedings on the basis of the compromise. The said application was filed. The trial Court, vide order dated 6.4.2010 allowed the parties to compound the offence under Section 406 I.P.C. but rejected the said application so far as the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C., hence the present miscellaneous petition for quashing of the proceedings against the accused-petitioners. 4. Mr. N.L. Joshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the dispute arose between the husband and wife owing to matrimonial differences and thus the complainant-respondent No. 2 was led to file the First Information Report against the petitioner. Thereafter wiser counsel have prevailed and the parties to the litigation have decided to settle the dispute by way of compromise and accordingly the compromise-petition was filed in the trial Court, which has been rejected by the impugned order. 5. Seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding on behalf of the accused, the present miscellaneous petition has been submitted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that once the matrimonial disputes have been settled and the parties have arrived at a compromise then continuance of the criminal proceedings is likely to unsettle the compromise arrived at between the parties. 5. Seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding on behalf of the accused, the present miscellaneous petition has been submitted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that once the matrimonial disputes have been settled and the parties have arrived at a compromise then continuance of the criminal proceedings is likely to unsettle the compromise arrived at between the parties. It has further been submitted that the ends of justice also require that the matrimonial disputes, if settled by the spouses then the criminal litigation should not be continued. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstance and looking to the fact that the spouses to the marriage have now decided to settle their disputes, this Court is of the opinion that the possibility of accused-petitioners being convicted in the case, is absolutely remote. Accordingly, when once the matrimonial disputes have been settled by mutual compromise, then no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. 7. Accordingly, the miscellaneous petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 295/2006 pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh, district Churu going on against the accused-petitioners, are hereby quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.Accordingly, the miscellaneous petition is allowed. The stay petition stands disposed of.Petition allowed. *******