JUDGMENT AND ORDER : HITESH KUMAR SARMA, J. This is an application, filed under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, seeking quashment of the FIR, in Tezpur PS Case No. 906/2016, corresponding to GR Case No. 1682/2016, under Sections 448/380/34 of the IPC. 2. I have perused the petition as well as the annexures furnished therewith including the copy of the FIR. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioners, Mr. D. Chakarabarty as well as Mr. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state respondent, Mr. B.J Dutta. 4. It has been submitted that the present petitioner No. 1 is the wife of the respondent No. 2 and the petitioner No. 2 is the father of the petitioner No. 1. 5. The fact, as revealed from the contents of the petition is that, there developed some disputes between petitioner No. 1 and her husband/respondent No. 2 at her matrimonial home, which ultimately, resulted in their segregation. They are living separately now. The present petitioners instituted a criminal case against the respondent No. 2 under Section 498(A) of the IPC as well as proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.PC for maintenance before the jurisdictional family court. The present FIR was filed by the respondent No. 2 against the accused-petitioner No. 1 and her father accused-petitioner No. 2, alleging commission of theft in respect of gold ornaments and Rs. 70,000/-, while she left the house of the respondent No. 2. 6. Before going into the merit of the case, this court records the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D. Chakrabarty, that the parties have settled the matter between them outside the court and that the present FIR is the outcome of several matrimonial disputes between the parties. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, Mr. I. Hussain, has also subscribed to such submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, meaning thereby, the matter has been settled between the parties and the same arose out of matrimonial disputes. 8. An agreement between the parties has also been produced before this court. The same be kept in record for future reference, if necessary. 9. I. Hussain, has also subscribed to such submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, meaning thereby, the matter has been settled between the parties and the same arose out of matrimonial disputes. 8. An agreement between the parties has also been produced before this court. The same be kept in record for future reference, if necessary. 9. In view of the fact that the case is between the husband and wife and the father of the wife and there are number of cases between them arising out of matrimonial controversies and as the matter has been settled between the parties, there is no chance that continuance of the prosecution will result in conviction of the accused-petitioners in the above facts and circumstances of the case. 10. That being so, the FIR, referred to above, is quashed. 11. The criminal petition stands disposed of accordingly. 12. Send down the LCR alongwith a copy of this judgment.