JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. T. Topu, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (1973) (Cr.P.C. for short) for quashing the charge-sheet No. 6/2014, corresponding to F.I.R. No. 46/2012, under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short). 3. It is submitted that an amicable settlement has arrived at between the petitioners, and further proceeding will be a futile exercise and abuse of the process of the Court. This case has been initiated by an FIR lodged by petitioner No. 2’s father (name withheld) with the police at Doimukh P.S., alleging inter alia that the petitioner No. 1 had kidnapped his minor daughter ‘X’ (name withheld) who was 16 years old at the time of the incident which occurred on 16.11.2012 at about 8 AM. A Doimukh P.S. Case No. 46/2012 was registered under Section 366 IPC and the FIR is annexed as Annexure-1 along with this petition. It is submitted that the informant’s daughter i.e. the petitioner No. 2 (‘X’) had a love relationship with the petitioner No. 1, but X’s parents rejected the proposal of petitioner No. 1. This impelled both the petitioners to enter into marriage without the consent of their parents by an agreement which was executed before the Executive Magistrate, Alipurduar, West Bengal on 29.01.2013. This agreement is annexed as Annexure No. 2 along with the petition. It is submitted that despite their marriage declaration, X’s parents pursued with the case against the Petitioner No.1 and their insistence and urged the police to investigate a false and concocted case. The petitioner No. 1 was arrested and later released on bail. 4. As days passed by, there was an amicable settlement and X’s parents finally sobered down and had forgiven the petitioner No. 1. It is apt to mention that the petitioner No. 1 and ‘X’ did not maintain a conjugal relationship and at present, they are not staying together as man and wife, yet they are maintaining a friendly relationship. The informant who lodged the FIR against the petitioner No. 1 has passed away. It is apt to mention that the petitioner No. 1 and ‘X’ did not maintain a conjugal relationship and at present, they are not staying together as man and wife, yet they are maintaining a friendly relationship. The informant who lodged the FIR against the petitioner No. 1 has passed away. A deed of agreement has been executed by the petitioners, which is annexed as Annexure-5 along with this petition under Section 482 CR.P.C. The agreement executed between the parties depict that both the parties have buried their hatchet and they are maintaining a cordial relationship as per the agreement. The petitioners have prayed for setting aside the charge-sheet No. 6/2014 of Doimukh P.S. Case No. 46/2012. 5. The learned Addl. P.P. has submitted that the offence alleged is non-compoundable but the flavour of this case is of a dispute arising out of strong dissent against marriage proposal by strict parents. The petitioner No. 2 is booked under Section 366 IPC. The Annexure No. 3 depicts that the petitioner was a major at the time of the incident as her date of birth is 30.07.1994. It appears that this matter is predominantly and overwhelmingly private in nature. There is no instance of any mental depravity. The Annexure No. 2 infers that ‘X’ got married to petitioner No. 1 on her own volition. Possibility of conviction appears to be bleak and remote. 6. I would like to rely on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 2 SCC 1230 wherein it has been observed that :- “13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under: (i) That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves; (ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society; …..” 7. Reverting back to this case it is held that this is a fit case where the inherent power of Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked. The facts and circumstances of this case depicts that further prosecution of this case will be an abuse of the process of the Court. There is no possibility of conviction. The deed of settlement between the petitioners was executed on 15.07.2022 being Registered No. 754 of 15.07.2022. Annexure No. 4 is summons issued to Petitioner No. 1 to appear before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Capital Complex, Yupia, to answer charges and the date is fixed on 13.06.2022. It is clear that this case is at its nascent stage. 8. Thereby, the Doimukh P.S. Case No. 46/2012, registered under Section 366 IPC pending in the Court of JMFC, Yupia and charge sheet No. 6/2014 is hereby quashed and set aside. Criminal petition is allowed.