IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application (C482) No.165 of 2011 Vijay Kumar Gupta S/o Ram Prakash Gupta R/o A-103, Govindpuram, Ghaziabad, District Ghaziabad ….…..Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home Civil Secretariat Uttarakhand Dehradun 2. Smt. Pallavi Gupta W/o Aman Gupta D/o Umesh Goel R/o C/o Boss Computec Pvt. Ltd. B-5, Sector-2, Noida ……Respondents Ms. Neelima Mishra, Advocate, present for the petitioner Mr. Hari Om Bhakuni, Brief Holder, present for the State Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate, present for the respondent no.2 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. By means of this petition, moved u/s 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner has sought quashing of proceedings of case no.108 of 2009 Pallavi Gupta vs. Aman Gupta and others, filed under section 12 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent no.2 (Pallavi Gupta) submitted before this Court that parties to 2 matrimony have already entered into compromise and the complainant does not want to prosecute the petitioner. Pallavi Gupta (respondent no.2), identified by her counsel Sri M.K. Goyal, Advocate, is present in Court, who verified the fact that she does not want to prosecute the petitioner, after she has entered into compromise with her husband Aman Gupta. In view of the above development, keeping in mind the spirit contained in B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana [2003 (4) SCC Page 675], this petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the petition u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Proceedings of case no.108 of 2009 Pallavi Gupta vs. Aman Gupta and others, filed under section 12 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, are hereby quashed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 14.12 11 .20 Rajni