ORDER 1. This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.342/2021 under Sections 498A/406/377/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Amar Colony, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.2 got married on 23.11.2017 and they lived together as wife and husband with each other. After the marriage, disputes and differences arose between them and they started living separately since January, 2020. Respondent no.2 got the above said FIR registered against the petitioners on 22.07.2021. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the trial, parties have settled the matter amicably by way of MOU dated 09.10.2021. Accordingly, petition under Section 13-B(2) of the HMA Act was allowed and the marriage of petitioner no.l and respondent no.2 was dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 07.12.2021 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Saket, New Delhi. 4. Issue notice. Learned ASC for the State enters appearance on advance notice and accepts notice. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 also enters appearance and accepts notice. 5. I have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent and learned ASC for the State. I have also perused the record. 6. The present petition, has been moved before this Court invoking Section 482 Cr.PC seeking quashing of the FIR No. 342/2021. It is pertinent to note here that offences under Sections 498A IPC and 377 IPC are not compoundable. The parties are constrained to move this Court for quashing on the basis of amicable resolution arrived at by them in the facts and circumstances noted above. 7. The scope and ambit of the power conferred on this Court by Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC) read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, in the particular context of prayer for quashing criminal proceedings, has been the subject matter of scrutiny and comment by the Supreme Court in a catena of judgments. It is well settled that in exercise of this inherent and wholesome power, the touchstone is as to whether the ends of justice so require. It is well settled that in exercise of this inherent and wholesome power, the touchstone is as to whether the ends of justice so require. This Court had the occasion to trace the relevant law on the subject in a batch of matters led by Yashpal Chaudhrani vs. State (Govt, of NCT Delhi), 2019 SCC Online Del 8179 wherein after taking note, inter alia, of State of Karnakata Fs. L Muniswamy, (1977) 2 SCC 699 ; State of Karnataka Vs. M. Devendrappa, (2002) 3 SCC 89 ; B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 ; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 ; Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, (2013) 4 SCC 58 ; K Srinivas Rao Vs. D.A. Deepa, (2013) 5 SCC 226 ; Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 ; State of Rajasthan Vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149 ; Parbhatbhai Aahir Vs. Bhimsinhbhai Kurmur, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, (2019) 5 SCC 688 ; the broad principles were culled out as under:- "55. Though the above-noted authoritative pronouncements o f the Supreme Court have consistently laid down the broad principles governing the exercise of power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.PC for bringing an end to the criminal process, for addressing the concerns noted at the outset and future guidance of trial courts, some o f the crucial ones may be flagged as under:- (i) . The inherent jurisdiction vested in the High Court, as recognized and preserved by Section 482 Cr. PC, is primarily to "prevent abuse o f the process o f court" or to "otherwise secure the ends o f justice". (ii) . The ends o f justice are higher than the ends o f mere law, the prime principle governing the exercise o f inherent power being "to do real, complete and substantial justice" for which the court exists. (iii) It is the duty o f the court to give "adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties" particularly in cases involving compoundable, offences, the exercise of inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., however, not being inhibited in case of non-compoundable offences though, for the latter category, such power is to be "exercised sparingly and with caution ". (iv) . (iv) . I f the criminal case has overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character", particularly if it arises out of "commercial" (financial, mercantile, partnership or such other) transaction - and this would include the "cheque bouncing cases" under Section 138 N.I. Act- or "matrimonial dispute" or "family dispute", genuine resolution on equitable terms, in entirety, by the parties should result in criminal proceedings being quashed. (v) . Since the institution o f marriage has an important role to play in the society, the court is to make every effort to encourage the parties to terminate such discord amicably and if it appears that elements o f settlement exist, and the parties are willing, they are to be directed to the process o f mediation to explore the possibility o f settlement, it being desirable to do so even at the "pre-litigation stage". (vi) . While examining the prayer for quashing of a non- compoundable offence, on the basis o f settlement of the dispute between the wrongful doer and the victim, the High Court is to bear in mind as to whether the possibility o f conviction is "remote and oblique" and further, if the continuation o f the criminal case would lead to "oppression and prejudice" or "extreme injustice"for the accused. (vii) . The considerations which would weigh with Court include the antecedents o f the accused, possible lack o f bona fides, his past conduct and that includes the question as to whether he had earlier absconded and as to how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise. (viii) . But, the High Court, when called upon to exercise the power under Section 482 Cr. PC to bring the criminal case to an end on the basis o f settlement, must steer clear of intervention in "heinous or "serious" offences, including those involving "mental depravity", as indeed "economic offences" affecting the financial and economic well being o f the State", such as murder, attempt to murder, extortion, forgery, rape, dacoity, financial or economic frauds, cases under Arms Act, etc., the reason being that such offences are "not private in nature" but have "a serious impact upon society", and continuation o f trial thereof is essential due to "overriding element o f public interest". (ix). (ix). The court, however, is not to go by mere use o f label o f a serious offence (e.g. offence under Section 307 IPC), it being open to it to examine, by scrutiny o f the evidence gathered, to find as to whether there are sufficient grounds to frame charge for such offence and, in this view, it being "notpermissible" to intervene till the matter has been properly investigated." 8. In a case where criminal proceedings arise essentially out of matrimonial dispute and the parties have decided to bury the hatchet, the court must examine if there is any likelihood of the criminal prosecution resulting in conviction. In fact-situation wherein the matrimonial relation has been brought to an end by mutual consent and the parties are eager to move on with their respective lives seeking closure and if there is nothing to indicate lack of bonafide on the part of any side, denial of the prayer for quashing the criminal case would restore acrimony rather than bring about peace. Allowing continuance of the criminal action would be fruitless and clearly an abuse of judicial process. 9. The case at hand passes the muster of the above-noted tests. 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of this case, this petition is allowed and FIR No.342/2021 under Sections 498A/406/377/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Amar Colony, Delhi, and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed. 11. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.