JUDGMENT Bala Krishna Narayana and Vijay Lakshmi, JJ. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the FIR dated 25.2.2015 registered as Case Crime No. 41 of 2015, under Section 363 IPC, P.S. Baberu, District Banda (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). 3. The following order dated 22.5.2015 was passed as under: - "Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 3, learned AGA and perused the record. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 25.2.2015 in Case Crime No. 41 of 2015, under Section 363 IPC, P.S. Baberu, District Banda and for issuance of a direction to the Respondent No. 2 not to arrest the petitioners till any credible evidence is found against them. The petitioners Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi alias Anilesh Chandra Tripathi and Smt. Sweta Singh are present in person before the Court, who have been identified by their respective counsel. An endorsement to this effect has also been made on the order sheet of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted the petitioners are major and out of their own free will and volition, they have performed marriage. He further submitted that earlier a Writ Petition No. 11556 of 2015 was filed by the petitioners seeking a direction from this Court not to take coercive steps against the petitioners except in accordance with law and this Court while disposing of the said writ petition has observed in paragraph 10 of the writ petition as follows; "10. However, for the future security of the petitioner-wife, the petitioner-husband is directed to deposit Rs. 5,00000/- in a nationalised Bank/post office in the form of fixed deposit for a period of not less than three years within six weeks in the exclusive name of the petitioner-wife." Learned counsel for the Respondents No. 3 has stated that despite the specific order passed by this Court, Rs. 5 lacs has not been deposited by the Petitioner No. 1 in a nationalised bank/post office in the form of fixed deposit in the name of the petitioner No. 2 (wife). 5 lacs has not been deposited by the Petitioner No. 1 in a nationalised bank/post office in the form of fixed deposit in the name of the petitioner No. 2 (wife). In reply to this, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that since on the very same day when the aforementioned order was passed by this Court, an FIR was lodged against the petitioner No. 1, as such, he could not deposit the aforementioned amount and further prayed that some short time may be granted to the Petitioner No. 1 to comply with the said order. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the matter be listed on 21.4.2015 to enable the Petitioner No. 1 to comply with the order dated 25.2.2015 and further to produce the receipts in respect thereof before this Court in terms of the order passed by this Court in the said writ petition on the next date fixed. Till the next date of listing, the petitioners shall neither be arrested nor any coercive action shall be taken against them." 4. When this matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners informed the Court that the petitioner husband has deposited a sum of Rs. 5 lacs in Aliganj Post Office, District Banda under 5 Year National Savings Certificate.Certificate in this regard also issued by the aforesaid post office. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 has not disputed the aforesaid fact. 6. Since both the petitioners are major and out of their own free will and volition, they have performed their marriage and are living as husband and wife and future security of petitioner wife has been also ensured by the petitioner husband Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi alias Anilesh Chandra Tripathi, by investing Rs. 5 lacs in the name of the petitioner No.2, Smt. Sweta Singh by N.S.C Scheme of the post office and the respondent No.3, who is mother of the petitioner No.2, is also no longer interested in prosecuting the petitioner No.1, we are of the view that the continuance of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner's husband shall be an exercise in futile. The dispute being purely of personal which had arisen due to marriage of petitioner No.2 with petitioner No.1 against the wish of respondent No.3, mother of petitioner No.2, has been settled in between the parties out side the Court. 7. The dispute being purely of personal which had arisen due to marriage of petitioner No.2 with petitioner No.1 against the wish of respondent No.3, mother of petitioner No.2, has been settled in between the parties out side the Court. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow this writ petition and quash the impugned F.I.R. Petition Allowed.