JUDGMENT : Vivek Singh Thakur, J. The instant petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred to as ‘Cr.PC’), has been filed by petitioner-accused, assailing judgment dated 11.3.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2016, titled Dhanpat Vs. Bansla @ Bandana Kumari, whereby judgment passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Hamirpur in Petition No. 11 of 2014 has been upheld. 2. During pendency of this petition, matter was referred for mediation, where matter has been settled amicably. In furtherance to the compromise arrived at between the parties, joint application has been filed, duly supported by affidavits of both the parties. 3. Petitioner Dhanpat as well as respondent Bansla @ Bandna Kumari are present in the Court today. They have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Their statements, on oath, have been recorded separately. 4. Statement of Dhanpat reads as under:- “My first marriage was solemnized with Vidya Devi. After her death I came in contact of respondent Bansla @ Bandna Kumari in the year 1999. Her husband had also expired. We solemnized marriage on 26.11.1999. Out of this wedlock no child was born. I have one daughter from my first marriage. Now she has been married and she alongwith her husband and children is residing with me. Bansla left matrimonial home in the year 2010 and I filed a divorce petition against her. That petition was allowed vide order dated 25.3.2019 passed in HMA Petition No. 145 of 2015 under Sections 13(1)(i-a)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and our marriage was dissolved. During interregnum period respondent filed an application/petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur, which was decided by the Chief Judicial Magistrate vide judgment dated 6.6.2016, awarding maintenance of 3,000/- per month to be paid to Bansla by me from the date of order and she was also held entitled for protection and residence under the Act and I was also held liable to pay compensation of 10,000/- to her. I preferred an appeal against the said order under Section 29 of Protection of Domestic Violence Act, which was dismissed on 11.3.2019, whereupon I filed present petition, assailing the aforesaid order passed under the Domestic Violence Act. I preferred an appeal against the said order under Section 29 of Protection of Domestic Violence Act, which was dismissed on 11.3.2019, whereupon I filed present petition, assailing the aforesaid order passed under the Domestic Violence Act. During pendency of present petition, matter was referred for mediation and in the mediation matter has been amicably settled. As per settlement Bansla has agreed to compromise all matters pending in the Courts against receipt of 4,00,000/-, out of that 77,000/- has already been paid by me to her and a sum of 1,99,743/- is lying deposited in the Registry and balance amount of 1,23,500/- shall be paid by me in two equal installments of 61,750/- by depositing the same in the Registry of this Court latest by 31.5.2023 and 30.11.2023. My statement was also recorded before learned Mediator and we have also filed a joint application for deciding the present petition in terms of compromise. The application is supported by affidavits of both of us. I endorse my signatures on the application as well as on the affidavit, contents whereof have been explained to me in vernacular. I verify the same to be true and correct. I have signed the compromise and deposing in this Court out of my free will, consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.” 5. Statement of respondent Bansla @ Bandna Kumari reads as under: “I have heard statement of Dhanpat. I endorse the same to be true and correct. During pendency of present petition, matter was referred for mediation and in the mediation matter has been amicably settled. In terms of compromise I have accepted dissolution of marriage with petitioner Dhanpat and all pending matters shall be treated to have been settled and compromised in terms of aforesaid compromise, subject to payment of balance amount by petitioner Dhanpat, as undertaken by him in the compromise before learned Mediator as well as in his deposition in the Court. My statement was also recorded before learned Mediator and we have also filed a joint application for deciding the present petition in terms of compromise. The application is supported by affidavits of both of us. I endorse my signatures on the application as well as on the affidavit, contents whereof have been explained to me in vernacular. I verify the same to be true and correct. The application is supported by affidavits of both of us. I endorse my signatures on the application as well as on the affidavit, contents whereof have been explained to me in vernacular. I verify the same to be true and correct. I have signed the compromise and deposing in this Court out of my free will, consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.” 6. In view of aforesaid, present petition is disposed of in terms of compromise, with direction to the petitioner to deposit balance amount in the Registry of this Court, as undertaken by him, with rights to the respondent to file appropriate application for release of amount deposited and also to file appropriate proceedings in case amount is not deposited/paid. Any matter pending between the parties shall also be deemed to have been closed in terms of compromise on production of copy of this order by either party before such Court. 7. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also pending applications, if any. 8. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this judgment, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, passing of order can be verified from Website of the High Court.