ORDER : Mr. Mohammad Rafiq, J. Accused-petitioners have filed this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashment of criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.722/2015 pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.24, Bassi, Jaipur, which arose out of F.I.R. No. 23/2014, Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur, for offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and also for quashment of the charge-sheet filed therein. 2. It is contended that marriage of accused-petitioner no.1 and complainant-respondent no.2 was solemnized on 08.12.2004, but the same could not continue longer on account of certain disputes arose between parties to marriage and from 16.12.2013 the complainant-respondent no.2 left the matrimonial home permanently and has been residing with her parents. The F.I.R. No.23/2014, on the basis of complaint, came to be registered at Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur for offence under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at the instance of the complainant-respondent no.2 and after investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against accused-petitioners and Criminal Case No.722/2015 was registered before the Metropolitan Magistrate No.24, Bassi, Jaipur, for alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC. Thereafter, complainant-respondent no.2 filed an application under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which was registered as Case No.15/2015 before the trial court, which, due to the compromise arrived at between the parties, was permitted to be withdrawn and proceedings therein were dropped by the trial court vide order dated 28.03.2016. 3. It is contended that during the course of trial in Criminal Case No.722/2015, accused-petitioner no.1 and complainant-respondent no.2 amicably settled their disputes and arrived at compromise in the spirit of 'lok adalat' and executed compromise-deed dated 10.06.2015. The parties to marriage finally settled their all disputes and a permanent alimony of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees nine lacs only) was decided to be paid by the accused-petitioner no.1 to complainant-respondent no.2, which was paid through demand draft and accepted by complainant-respondent no.2, who encashed the same in her bank account on 28.03.2016. Thereafter, the complainant-respondent no.2 agreed to withdraw all the cases filed by her and also agreed to have decree of divorce. Therefore, both the parties to marriage i.e. accused-petitioner no.1 and complainant-respondent no.2 moved joint application for dissolution of their marriage and grant of decree of divorce. Thereafter, the complainant-respondent no.2 agreed to withdraw all the cases filed by her and also agreed to have decree of divorce. Therefore, both the parties to marriage i.e. accused-petitioner no.1 and complainant-respondent no.2 moved joint application for dissolution of their marriage and grant of decree of divorce. The learned Family Court No.2, Jaipur, vide its judgment and decree dated 09.04.2016 allowed the joint application of the parties and passed decree dissolving their marriage. On the basis of compromise-deed, the proceedings initiated under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act, 2005, also came to be withdrawn on the behest of the complainant-respondent no.2 herself. 4. It is submitted that complainant-respondent no.2 moved an application for compounding the matter in Criminal Case No.722/2015 and prayed for its withdrawal. Thereafter, the complainant-respondent no.2 moved an application on 05.04.2016 for dismissal of the criminal proceedings therein. It is submitted that if the criminal trial is allowed to proceed further, it would be wastage of precious time of the court as there is no possibility of any evidence to come on record in the criminal case to prove the offence punishable under Section 498A and 406 IPC. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 6. The question that fell for determination before the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and Others v. State of Haryana and Another - (2003) 4 SCC 675 , was about the ambit of the inherent powers of the High Courts under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to quash criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court therein observed that in matrimonial disputes of this kind have been on considerable increase in recent times resulting in filing of complaints by the wife under Sections 498A and 406, IPC, not only against the husband but his other family members also. The Supreme Court held that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband, and Section 498A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper-technical view would be counter productive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier, which is not the object of the provision. 7. Indisputably, in the present case the accused-petitioner and complainant-respondent amicably settled their disputes and arrived at compromise and executed compromise-deed dated 10.06.2015 and agreed to end the criminal proceedings in the case. Thus, there is no purpose to continue the criminal proceedings between the parties. 8. In the result, the criminal misc. petition is allowed. The criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.722/2015, which arose out of F.I.R. No.23/2014, Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur, pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.24, Bassi, Jaipur, for offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and also the charge-sheet filed therein, are quashed and set aside. This also disposes of stay application.