ORDER : Petitioners are seeking for quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.52104/2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 494 r/w Section 120(B) of IPC, C.C. No. 24488/2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 494 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and C.C.No.6507/2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 403 to 409 of IPC, pending on the file of XI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore and IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, respectively in these petitions. 2. Crl.P.No.2824/2015 came to be referred to mediation at request of parties and a report has been received from Bangalore Mediation Centre dated 21.04.2016 enclosing therewith settlement arrived at between the parties. Respondent in this petition, who is complainant, has agreed to withdraw complaint lodged by her against petitioners and she has also expressed her no objection for proceedings initiated against them being quashed on the ground that matter is settled between herself and first accused namely, Sri.Kolluru Srikanth before the Bangalore Mediation Centre. 3. On perusal of said settlement arrived between parties at Mediation would disclose that first petitioner has agreed to pay permanent alimony to his wife and also the son born out of said marriage, a total maintenance of Rs.55,00,000/- in full and final settlement towards their maintenance. Smt. Kolluru Vijayalakshmi – respondent - complainant is present before Court and submits that she has received a sum of Rs.45,00,000/- before Bangalore Mediation Centre and balance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- is paid today in Court by way of two Demand Drafts of Rs.6,00,000/- and Rs.4,00,000/- respectively and she has acknowledged the receipt of same. Pursuant to said settlement arrived at before Bangalore Mediation Centre, a Joint Memo is filed reiterating the terms agreed to before the Mediation Centre under such settlement. 4. Father-in-law and mother-in-law of defacto complainant namely, Sri. Kolluru Ramamurthy and Smt. Kolluru Umadevi had filed a complaint against second respondent - Smt. Kolluru Vijayalakshmi and her parents, which is registered as Cr.No.23/2013 by Maredpalli Police Station, Hyderabad, which is now stayed by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh in Crl.P.No.2877/2013 and it is agreed under the settlement arrived before Mediation Centre that complainants would get the proceedings quashed before the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh and effective steps in that regard would be taken by them. Said term as agreed to between parties before mediation is also reiterated by them at Clause 7 and 8 of the Joint Memo filed today and it reads as under: “7. The petitioner No.1 humbly submits that his parents namely Kolluru Sri Ramamurthy & Kolluru Umadevi had filed case against respondent No.2 and her family members which was registered in Cr.No.23/2013 of Maredpalli Police Station of Hyderabad and same is pending before Hon’ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Crl.Pet.No.2877/2013, wherein stay was already granted. 8. The Sriramamurthy Kollur undertakes for quashing of the aforesaid case and he will assist for the same in every manner before the Hon’ble Court.” 5. Smt.Vijayalakshmi, who is present before Court has also stated that out of free will and volition and without any force, threat or coercion she has affixed her signature to the Joint Memo after having understood the contents of the Joint Memo. She has also submitted that she has no objection for the criminal cases pending before the jurisdictional Courts being quashed. 6. To establish the identities of parties present photocopies of identity cards issued by the statutory authority, which are duly signed by the parties and counter signed by their learned Advocates are enclosed along with Joint Memo. Same is placed on record. 7. In the light of aforestated facts, this Court is of the considered view that proceedings which are now pending in various Courts, as indicated hereinabove, if continued would result in an exercise being carried out in futility and it would not serve any fruitful purpose. Hence, in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , said proceedings are liable to be quashed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Crl.P.Nos.2824/2015, 1233/2017, 6894/2016 and 6895/2016 are hereby allowed. (ii) Proceedings pending against petitioners in C.C.No.52104/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 494 r/w Section 120(B) of IPC, C.C.No.24488/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 494 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and C.C.No.6507/2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 403 to 409 of IPC, pending on the file of XI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore and IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, are hereby quashed. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore and IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, are hereby quashed. (iii) Petitioners are acquitted of the aforesaid offences. (iv) However, it is made clear that in the event of petitioners 1 and 2 herein i.e., complainants in Cr.No.23/2013 not cooperating with the accused to get the said proceedings quashed, defacto complainant in these proceedings i.e., Smt. Kollur Vijayalakshmi (respondent No.2 herein) would be at liberty to move this Court for further orders in these writ petitions. All pending applications stands rejected.