IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.Rev.No. 158 of 2010. Date of Decision:8.9.2010.. _______________________________________________ Joginder Singh Thakur. ….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1? For the petitioner :Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent. :Mr.P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). Heard learned counsel for the parties. The records of the civil suit were called for. It is undisputed before me even by the respondent that the entire controversy which is the subject matter of these proceedings has since been resolved in civil proceedings and a compromise decree has been passed in favour of the complainant-respondent. He is satisfied with the relief which has been granted to him. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the entire controversy has now been resolved, continuation of the proceedings before the criminal Court will be nothing but an abuse of the process of law. He relies upon the decision of the Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? . 2 Supreme Court in Sardool Singh and another Vs. Smt. Nasib Kaur, 1987 (Supp) S.C.C.146. Taking into consideration the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the controversy in the criminal case has now been resolved amicably, further proceedings in FIR. No. 286 of 2003 are quashed and set aside. The petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. September 8, 2010(R)