ORDER : 1. This Criminal Petition No. 200579/2018 and Writ Petition Nos. 202701/2016 & 202736-202741/2016 are taken up together with the consent of both the parties to the respective petitions. 2. Criminal Petition is filed by accused No. 1 to 3 with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings pending on the file of Addl. District and Session Court, Bidar, arising out of Crime No. 33/2016, now numbered as S.C. No. 218/2017, for the offences punishable under Section 498(A), 323, 504, 506, 307 R/w 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. 3. The second respondent is the complainant and she is the wife of petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 2 is the mother of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 3 is the brother of petitioner No. 1. 4. W.P. No. 202701/2016 & 202736-202741/2016 is filed by the petitioners praying to quash the entire proceedings in Criminal Misc. No. 995/2016 before the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC-II Court, Bidar, filed by the respondent under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against the petitioners praying to award maintenance and also seeking other reliefs. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/complainant have filed a joint petition stating that the elders of both the parties, well-wishers and others have advised them to arrive at a compromise and both the parties have now agreed for the same. They have sought to allow the compromise petition and to set aside and quash the proceedings pending in S.C. No. 218/2017 on the file of Addl. District and Session Judge at Bidar and the proceedings in Criminal Misc. No. 995/2016 pending before the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Bidar. 6. It is also submitted by the parties that the petitioner No. 1 has agreed to give a total amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- by way of two DD’s of Rs. 4,00,000/- each and they submitted that DD No. 139662 dated 01.10.2018 and DD No. 139663 dated 01.10.2018 has been handed over to the respondent/complainant as full and final settlement and the respondent No. 2 has accepted the same. 7. The parties have also filed a memorandum of settlement entered between the respondent-Rubeena Parveen and petitioner No. 1 Md. Firsat Khan @ Imran S/o Late Md. 7. The parties have also filed a memorandum of settlement entered between the respondent-Rubeena Parveen and petitioner No. 1 Md. Firsat Khan @ Imran S/o Late Md. Sadat Khan, as per the said memorandum of settlement, the respondent has agreed to withdraw all the cases in terms of the above compromise petition and memorandum of settlement between the parties. 8. The parties are present before the Court. They are identified by their respective counsels. The complainant/respondent No. 2 submits that she has settled all the disputes on her own volition and without any pressure from any one and she is willing to withdraw all cases filed by her. She has also endorsed having received the aforesaid DD's as a full and final settlement. 9. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 has laid down certain principles as to in what circumstance, the proceedings can be quashed particularly, when the dispute is matrimonial and private in nature. The said guidelines thus reads : “Held, power of High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from power of a criminal Court of compounding offences under Section 320 Cases where power to quash criminal proceedings may be exercised where the parties have settled their dispute, held, depends on facts and circumstances of each case before exercise of inherent power under Section 482. High Court must have due regard to nature and gravity of the crime and its societal impact. Thus, held heinous and serious offences of mental depravity, murder, rape, dacoity, etc. or under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or offences committed by public servants while working in their capacity as public servants, cannot be quashed even though victim or victim’s family and offender have settled the dispute such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society.” 10. or under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or offences committed by public servants while working in their capacity as public servants, cannot be quashed even though victim or victim’s family and offender have settled the dispute such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society.” 10. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held as under: “Cr.P.C. Section 482Quashment of proceedings on basis of settlement between parties – offence alleged under Section 307 IPC - Falls in the category of heinous and serious offences and generally to be treated as crime against society – Power of quashment in such cases – guidelines laid down – Held, only because FIR/charge sheet incorporates provisions of Section 307 IPC would not, by itself, be a ground to reject the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and refuse to accept the settlement between the parties – Quashment of proceedings depends on facts and circumstances of each case – Detailed guidelines laid down (in para 29) for High Courts to form a view under what circumstances it should accept the settlement between the parties and quash the proceedings and when it should refrain from doing so cases where Court had approved quashing of proceedings under Section 307 of IPC and where it was rejected, considered – Penal Code, 1860, Section 307.” 11. Keeping in view the guideline issued in the aforesaid decisions and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present case and the compromise and settlement entered between the parties, I am of the view that, this is a fit case wherein inherent power under Section 482 Cr.PC requires to be exercised, as no purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings before the Trial Court. Under the above said facts and circumstances, I deem it fit to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.PC and to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice. 12. Accordingly, Petitions are allowed. Consequently the criminal proceedings in S.C. No. 218/2017 pending on the file of Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Bidar as well as the proceedings in Criminal Misc. No. 995/2016 pending before the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC Court, Bidar are hereby quashed. All the pending IA’s are disposed off.