Criminal Misc. No. M- 34704 OF 2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 34704 OF 2010(O&M) Date of decision:21st January, 2011 Vikas Kumar and others .......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: None for the petitioners. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Advocate, for Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for respondent No. 1. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Ritu Bahri, J.(Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing of FIR No.99, dated 9.10.2009, registered under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Jalandhar Cantt., District Jalandhar and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise. Counsel for respondent No. 2 has filed the compromise deed today in Court and the same is taken on record, which has been Criminal Misc. No. M- 34704 OF 2010(O&M) 2 reached between the parties before the Mediation Centre on 15.11.2010. As per compromise deed the matrimonial dispute between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 has been settled as they have agreed to part ways and it has been agreed between the parties that the total amount of Rs. 5,25,000/- shall be paid to respondent No. 2 as full and final settlement in respect of permanent alimony, maintenance and on all other accounts of her and in respect of her son. As far as custody of minor child is concerned he will remain with the mother. It is prayed that as parties have settled their differences and have executed a compromise, dated 15.11.2010 therefore, the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as parties have entered into a compromise, the State does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the compromise dated 15.11.2010 and am of the considered opinion that the petitioners and respondent no. 2 have resolved their differences by a bonafide compromise, free from any fraud, coercion or undue influence. The Complainant-Ms. Ranjita, who is present in Court has been duly identified by her counsel. She acknowledges the correctness of the compromise, referred to hereinabove and states that she has no objection if the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Criminal Misc. No. M- 34704 OF 2010(O&M) 3 Consequently, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is allowed and the FIR No. 99, dated 9.10.2009, registered under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Jalandhar Cantt., District Jalandhar, and all consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. [RITU BAHRI] JUDGE 21st January, 2011 Shivani Kaushik