Vijay Bishnoi, J. - (1.) THESE criminal misc. petitions under section 482 Cr.P.C. have been preferred by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the proceedings of Cr. Regular Case No. 282/2013 pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate No. 2, Jodhpur Metropolitan and the FIR No. 95/2011 dated 26.04.2011 of Mahila Police Station, Jodhpur.
(2.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the criminal proceedings were initiated against the petitioners at the instance of respondent No. 2, who lodged the FIR No. 95/2011 dated 26.04.2011 at Police Station, Women, Jodhpur, in which the police, after thorough investigation, has filed charge -sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under sections 498 -A and 406 IPC and later on the trial court has declared the petitioners as absconder and ordered for issuance of standing warrants against them and also initiated proceedings against them under sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. Today, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the matrimonial dispute between the petitioners and respondent No. 2 has been resolved on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties on 25.02.2015. It is contended that by mutual consent petitioner Anand Purohit and respondent No. 2 Amita Purohit have decided to live separately and they have filed a joint application before the court concerned for grant of decree of divorce by mutual consent.
(3.) MR . Mahesh Bora - learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Arpit Mehta appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 has also verified that the parties have arrived at amicable settlement and for which an agreement has also been executed between them and, therefore, now the respondent No. 2 does not want to press the allegations levelled against the petitioners in the FIR No. 95/2011. It is submitted by Mr. Bora that if the court proceedings pending against the petitioners are quashed, then respondent No. 2 has no objection.;