Crl. Misc. No.M-3667 of 2011 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-3667 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: 26.07.2011 Anil Bhandula and others ……Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another …...Respondents Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr. Ravinder Malik (Ravi), Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S. S. Nara, Sr. DAG, Haryana for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2-Mamta Rani in person. L.N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) Anil Bhandula and his parents have filed the instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr. P.C) for quashing of FIR No.343 dated 21.09.2006, under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC registered at police station, Model Town, Panipat (Annexure P-1) and also for quashing of petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-2), in view of compromise (Annexure P-3) effected with respondent No.2-complainant-Mamta Rani. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. 1 Crl. Misc. No.M-3667 of 2011 (O & M) Mamta Rani-respondent No.2 and Anil Bhandula- petitioner No.1 are present in person and have been identified by counsel for the petitioners. Respondent No.2 admits that compromise (Annexure P-3) has been effected between the parties. It is also stated by her that pursuant to compromise, she had received Rs. 5,50,000/- from petitioner No.1 and in view of compromise, she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR. It is also stated that she would withdraw her petition (Annexure P-2) filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C from the concerned Court. In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromising by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It is so particular in matrimonial cases in dispute. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) Law Herald (Punjab & Haryana) 2225. In the instant case, the impugned FIR is result of matrimonial dispute between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. The said dispute has been settled as per compromise (Annexure P- 3) effected in the Mediation Centre where FAO No.M-292 of 2009 arising out of divorce petition was referred for mediation. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have also agreed to get their marriage dissolved by divorce by mutual consent. It is, therefore, a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR No.343 dated 21.09.2006, under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC registered at police station, Model Town, Panipat 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-3667 of 2011 (O & M) (Annexure P-1) is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. As regards petition (Annexure P-2 ) filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C, respondent No.2 shall withdraw the same from the concerned Court. (L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 26.07.2011 A.kaundal 3