JUDGMENT : 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. D.M.Devnani, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 State of Gujarat. Mr. Kalrav Patel, the learned Counsel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.2original first informant and the victim. 2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants-original accused persons have prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) To allow this application. (B) To quash and set aside FIR being ICR. No. 299/2009 registered with Limbayat Police Station, Surat and judgment and order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate First Class (3rd Court), Surat in Criminal Case no. 26010/09 along with all prior subsequent proceedings thereto; (B) Pending admission final hearing and disposal of this application to stay further proceedings of Criminal Appeal No. 182/17 pending in the Court of Dist. & Sessions Court, Surat; (C) To dispense with the filing of chargesheet papers as the present petition is filed on the ground of settlement. (D) To pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.” 3. It appears from the material on record that the applicants herein were put on trail in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.3, Surat, in the Criminal Case No. 26010 of 2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 5 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. The learned 3rd JMFC, Surat, by judgment and order dated 31.07.2017, convicted all the five applicants herein for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced the applicants to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of two years for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and six months of simple imprisonment for the offences punishable under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 5. Being dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction, the applicants preferred the Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 2017 in the Sessions Court at Surat. The substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court came to be suspended from its operation under Section 398 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 5. Being dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction, the applicants preferred the Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 2017 in the Sessions Court at Surat. The substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court came to be suspended from its operation under Section 398 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Pending the appeal before the Sessions Court, the applicants were ordered to be released on bail. While the appeal is pending before the Sessions Court, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement keeping in mind the interest of four minor children. 6. The respondent No.2 original first informant is here before this Court. She submitted that she has resolved the dispute with her husband and the other applicants and she is residing on date at her matrimonial home. She has filed an affidavit in this regard which reads as under: “I, Munirabibi W/o Mustakhussain Azgarhussain shaikh D/o Yusuf Shaikh Sandu, Aged: 35 years, Sex : Female, Having Address as 21, Ichaba Society, Nr. Aman School, Limbayat, Surat on solemn affirmation states as under :- 1. I say that I am the Orig. complainant who lodged an FIR with Limbayat Police Station, Surat being ICR. No. 299/2009 for the alleged offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2), 114 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3,5,7 of Dowry Prohibition Act 06.10.2009 against the present petitioners. 2. I say that in pursuant to the aforesaid FIR, investigation was carried out and thereafter, the investigation officer had filed the chargesheet before the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat being Criminal Case No. 26010/09. I further say that the Petitioners-accused came to be convicted in the said criminal case and hence preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Dist. And Sessions Court at Surat being Criminal Appeal No. 182/2017 and at present the said appeal is pending. 3. I say that pending the said appeal, I and petitioners have entered into settlement voluntarily with the intervention of elders and community members. 4. I say that the matter is now settled between me and the petitioner and that I do not have any grievances against the present petitioners. I further say that I and petitioner No.1husband have reconciled and are living happily together with our four children and petitioner nos. 2 and 3. 5. I say that in aforesaid facts and circumstances if the FIR being ICR. NO. I further say that I and petitioner No.1husband have reconciled and are living happily together with our four children and petitioner nos. 2 and 3. 5. I say that in aforesaid facts and circumstances if the FIR being ICR. NO. 299/2009 registered with Limbayat Police Station, Surat and judgment and order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate First Class (3rd Court), Surat in Criminal Case No. 26010/09 along with all subsequent proceedings are quashed and set aside than I have no objection. 6. I say that the present affidavit is sworn by me with my free will and wish without any coercion and will abide by the present undertaking” The affidavit of the respondent No.2 is ordered to be taken on record. 7. The husband, namely Mustakhussain Azgarhussain Shaikh, has also filed an undertaking on oath interalia stating as under: “I, Mustakhussain S/o Azgarhussain Shaikh, Aged: 40 Years, Sex: Male, Residing at 21, Ichaba Society, Nr. Aman School, Limbayat, Surat hereby solemnize and undertake before this Hon'ble Court that : 1. I will keep Resp.no.2 my wife properly and will treat her well and will give her all respect. I will never create a situation whereby matrimonial disputes arise again and will maintain her status and respect in society and family over and above all her basic needs and requirements. I will never relinquish her and will be with her in all circumstances and situation. 2. I further state that pursuant to mutual settlement dated 27.10.2017, me and Respondent No.2 have started residing as husband and wife under one roof with our four children and petitioner nos. 2 and 3. 3. I further state that I am filing this undertaking with my free will and wish without any coercion and will abide by the present undertaking” The same is ordered to be taken on record. 8. The question is that as all the applicants have been convicted by the trial Court and their appeal is pending before the Sessions Court, whether this Court should accept the settlement and quash the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court? This issue has been decided by this Court in the case of Ashishbhai Nagindas Navsarivala vs. State of Gujarat in the Criminal Misc. Application No. 27481 of 2017, decided on 16.11.2017. The settlement before the Sessions Court is not possible because the Sessions Court has no inherent powers. This issue has been decided by this Court in the case of Ashishbhai Nagindas Navsarivala vs. State of Gujarat in the Criminal Misc. Application No. 27481 of 2017, decided on 16.11.2017. The settlement before the Sessions Court is not possible because the Sessions Court has no inherent powers. The Appeal Court cannot even frame compounding of offences as Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code is a non-compoundable offence. In such circumstances, it is only this Court which can exercise inherent powers and put an end to this matter. Applying the principle of law as laid down in the above referred decision of this Court, this application is allowed. 9. The judgment and order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the learned 3rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat, in the Criminal Case No. 26010 of 2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. As the judgment and order of conviction passed by the trial Court has been quashed and set aside, the Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 2017 pending before the Sessions Court at Surat would not survive and the same may be disposed of by the learned Sessions Court accordingly. Parties are directed to abide by the terms of the undertaking. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.