ORDER : Sri A.S. Inamdar, learned counsel submits that he takes notice for respondent No.1 and he is permitted to file vakalat in the Registry. 2. The learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondent No.2. 3. This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings initiated in C.C. No. 568/2015 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM Court at Vijayapur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 4. Facts of the case are that, The marriage of the complainant was performed with petitioner No.1/accused No.1 on 18.05.2014 as per the Muslim customs. At the time of marriage, parents of the complainant gave 50 grams of gold and cash of Rs.20,000/- and household articles worth Rs.3,00,000/- to the accused. After the marriage, her husband under the guise of doing business used to go out of station and he used to come to the house once in a week. Suspecting conduct of her husband, the complainant kept a watch on the movement of her husband and thereafter, she came to know that he is having illicit relationship with one Rajashri and when the complainant questioned the same, he started ill-treating and harassing her and used to demand the complainant to bring dowry for the purpose of purchase of site, motorcycle and other things. It is further alleged that along with petitioner No.1/accused No.1, accused Nos.2 and 3 who are mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant used to demand dowry and used to ill-treat and harass the complainant. On the basis of the above allegations, a complaint was lodged and a case has been registered. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2. 6. At the time of hearing, learned counsel appearing for both the parties have submitted that the matter has been amicably compromised by putting an end to the marital status of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 by virtue of Talaq and they have requested to quash the proceedings. In that light, they have filed application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., reporting compromise. In that light, they have filed application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., reporting compromise. The petitioners namely, Mohammed Sadik, Lalbi and Aayisha are present before the Court and they have been identified by the counsel for the petitioners. Respondent No.1 namely, Khalida Khanam wife of petitioner No.1 is also present before the Court and she has been identified by her counsel. Both the counsels and the parties have identified each other. Both the parties have filed a compromise petition wherein they have stated that they have compounded the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Though the offences alleged against the petitioners are not compoundable, they have approached this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., as this Court can entertain such compromise petition as held in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 wherein it has been held that the High Court has got ample power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., even to permit the parties to compound the offences in a non-compoundable cases and to quash the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint. 7. As could be seen from the complaint, the allegations made against the petitioners are that petitioners have demanded dowry and have ill-treated and harassed the complainant. Now they have compromised the matter amicably by putting an end to the marital status of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 by virtue of Talaq. In that light, when the parties have settled their disputes, the same will not be having any impact on the society and the offences alleged against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case on hand and the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and in view of compromise and settlement of the case, I feel that the proceedings in C.C.No.568/2015 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM Court at Vijayapur, deserve to be quashed. 8. The proceeding in C.C.No.568/2015 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM Court at Vijaypur, is hereby quashed. 8. The proceeding in C.C.No.568/2015 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM Court at Vijaypur, is hereby quashed. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition.