IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc.Application (C482) No. 1171 of 2010 1- Smt. Sudesh Sharma W/o Shri B.N. Sharma 2- Vikrant Shounak S/o Shri B.N. Sharma Both R/o 375 Badripur Road, Jogiwala, Police Station Nehru Colony, District Dehradun. ….…..Petitioners Versus 1- State of Uttarakhand through Principal Secretary of Home, Dehradun. 2- Smt. Tarika Shounak W/o Shri Aprajit Shounak D/o Shri Harish Chandra Mohan, R/o 375 Badripur Road, Jogiwala, District Dehradun. Presently R/o 7, Neshvilla Road, Dehradun. ……Respondents Mr. Sandeep Tandon, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Mr. T.C. Agarwal, Additional G.A., present for the State. Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate, present for the respondent no.2 With Criminal Misc.Application (C482) No. 87 of 2011 Aparajit Shounik S/o Shri B.N. Sharma R/o 375 Badripur Road, Jogiwala, Police Station Nehru Colony, District Dehradun. ….…..Petitioner Versus 1- State of Uttarakhand through Principal Secretary of Home, Dehradun. 2- Smt. Tarika Shounak W/o Shri Aprajit Shounak D/o Shri Harish Chandra Mohan, R/o 375 Badripur Road, Jogiwala, District Dehradun. Presently R/o 7, Neshvilla Road, Dehradun. ……Respondents Mr. Sandeep Tandon, Advocate, present for the petitioner. Mr. T.C. Agarwal, Additional G.A., present for the State. Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate, present for the respondent no.2 2 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2) By means of these petitions, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioners have sought quashing of proceedings of criminal case no. 1140 of 2010(old Misc. No. 187 of 2009), State Vs. Aparajit Shounak and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 406 I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station- Kotwali, District Dehradun, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. 3) A compounding application No. 1211 of 2011, is moved on behalf of the petitioners and respondent No.2, whereby it has been brought on record that the parties to matrimony have entered into compromise and decided to get terminated the litigations between them. The compounding application is supported by affidavits of petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2. 4) It is pointed out that the compromise has already been verified before the trial court, as is apparent from the annexures filed with the affidavit of respondent No.2. 5) In the above circumstances, in view of the principle laid down in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of 3 Haryana and Another, 2003, 4 SCC Page No. 675, both these petitions deserve to be allowed. 6) Accordingly, both the petitions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., are allowed. The proceedings of criminal case no. 1140 of 2010 (old Misc. No. 187 of 2009), State Vs. Aparajit Shounak and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 406 I.P.C., and one punishable under section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station-Kotwali, District Dehradun, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, are hereby quashed against all the accused including the petitioners. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 13.10.2011 JM