ORDER : Heard Mr. S.P. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Nitish Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3. 2. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Dugda P.S. Case No. 16 of 2009, corresponding to G.R. No. 320 of 2009, including the order dated 29.03.2011 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 366-A/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that the First Information Report was instituted by the opposite party No. 2 who happens to be the brother of the opposite party No.3 to the effect that the opposite party No. 3 had taken away by the petitioner but she did not return back. It is also alleged that the opposite party No.3 was staying with the family members of the petitioner. Based on the aforesaid allegations Dugda P.S. Case No. 16 of 2009 was instituted. 4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the marriage of the petitioner has been solemnized with the opposite party No. 3 on 10.05.2009 in a temple in presence of the family members and guardians of the opposite party No.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of the said wedlock a child has also been born and the petitioner as well as the opposite party No. 3 are leading a happy and peaceful conjugal life. Learned counsel has also referred to the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner and brought to the notice of this Court an order passed in Cr. Misc. Case No. 34 of 2016 to substantiate his contention that the petitioner and the opposite party No. 3 are staying together and are leading a happy marital life. 5. Mr. Nitish Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 has accepted the factum of compromise and has stated that neither the opposite party No.2 nor the opposite party No.3 have any objection if the entire criminal proceedings as against the petitioner is quashed. 6. It appears from the entire narration of the events that the matter has been settled between the parties and the opposite party No. 3 is staying with the petitioner which could be gathered from the order passed in Cr. Misc. 6. It appears from the entire narration of the events that the matter has been settled between the parties and the opposite party No. 3 is staying with the petitioner which could be gathered from the order passed in Cr. Misc. Case No. 34 of 2016. Apart from what has been stated in the petition it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 that in fact the opposite party No.2 who is the informant of Dugda P.S. Case No. 16 of 2009 is the brother of the opposite party No. 2 and he also does not have any objection if the entire criminal proceedings as against the petitioner is quashed. 7. In view of the fact that initially the First Information Report was instituted with respect to enticement of the opposite party No.3 by the petitioner which subsequently led. to solemnization of marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party No.3 and since both the parties are living together peacefully and the opposite party No.2 also does not have any grievance if the entire criminal proceedings comes to an end, it would be an exercise in futility to continue with the criminal proceedings. 8. Accordingly, in view of what has been stated above, this application is allowed on the basis of compromise and the entire criminal proceedings as against the petitioner in connection with Dugda P.S. Case No. 16 of 2009, corresponding to G.R. No. 320 of 2009, including the order dated 29.03.2011 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 366-A/120-B of the Indian Penal is, hereby, quashed and set aside. 9. Pending I.A. also stands disposed of. Petition disposed of.