The Calcutta High Court recently quashed a criminal case against a husband and his family after the couple settled their matrimonial dispute, with the man agreeing to pay Rs 13 lakh as a one-time permanent alimony to his estranged wife. The court observed that continuing the case would only “prolong distress” for the couple and all those involved and burden the courts without the “likelihood of a productive outcome.”Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee noted that the wife had earlier accused the husband and his family of physical and mental cruelty, and criminal breach of trust, but later agreed not to pursue the case. The court was hearing a plea filed by the husband and his family seeking to quash the criminal proceedings arising from the complaint.“Continuing with the criminal proceeding would not serve any meaningful purpose but will only prolong distress for all concerned and will burden the courts without the likelihood of a productive outcome,” the September 9 order read.Also Read | ‘Man’s income Rs 1.5 lakh’: MP High Court cancels Rs 30,000 monthly support for wifeMatter settled, filed for divorceFollowing a matrimonial dispute, the wife had initiated criminal proceedings alleging dowry demand, cruelty and criminal breach of trust, and charges were framed against the accused in 2019. Later, after the intervention of family members and well-wishers, the matter was amicably settled. The wife also did not want the criminal proceedings to continue, and the couple filed for mutual divorce.Representing the husband, advocate Sutapa Sanyal argued that during the case, the couple had amicably settled the dispute and the husband had agreed to pay Rs 13 lakh as one-time permanent alimony to the wife in a full and final settlement. Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee found that the husband had already paid the first instalment of Rs 3 lakh.The wife, represented by advocate Sanat Kumar Das, submitted that his client had settled the dispute with her husband and had decided not to support the allegations made in the complaint. Das also said that his client had no objection if the court allowed the request by the husband and his family to quash the matter.On the other hand, the state, through advocate Rajdeep Biswas, submitted that four witnesses had been examined during the investigation and the seized stridhan articles had already been returned to the wife. He also pointed out that the state did not want to oppose their settlement as the dispute was mainly matrimonial and private in nature, with no public policy issue involved.Story continues below this ad‘No fruitful result’The high court said the couple had reached an amicable settlement and did not want to pursue the criminal case further. It was also found that the husband had agreed to pay Rs 13 lakh as one-time permanent alimony in full and final settlement, in three instalments.It also noted that the husband had already paid the first instalment of Rs 3 lakh. The couple had agreed that the second instalment would be paid when the present criminal case and the Domestic Violence Act proceedings were withdrawn, while the final instalment of Rs 7 lakh would be paid on the date of the final hearing of the mutual divorce case.Also Read | Wife left for brother’s birthday in 1992, never returned: Court grants divorce to 67-year-oldThe court pointed out that if the request for quashing the case is rejected at this stage, then it may become “counterproductive”. “Since there is no chance of yielding any fruitful result by continuing the instant proceeding, I find that this is a fit case where the proceeding is to be quashed,” the judge stated.