IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 398 of 2005 1. Hainsli @ Guddu S/o Sri Samsul 2. Smt. Kathrin @ Sirin W/o Sri Hainsli @ Guddu 3. Ajay @ Minttu S/o Sri Hainsli @ Guddu 4. Anit @ Annu S/o Sri Hainsli @ Guddu 5. Smt. Alpana @ Pinky W/o Sri Bablu D/o Sri Hainsli @ Guddu All R/o Village Panahapur Police Station Pasgawa District Lakhimpur Khiri (U.P.) .... Applicants Vs. 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Judicial Magistrate, Khatima District Udham Singh Nagar 3. Smt. Iqbal Parvin D/o Sri Iqbal Masih W/o Sri Ajay @ Minttu R/o Village Majhola Collector Farm Police Station Khatima District Udham Singh Nagar ......Opp. Parties Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent No. 1. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C., the petitioners who are facing the trial in Case Crime No. 15 of 2004, under Sections 498A, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar have sought relief for quashing the aforesaid proceedings. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 3, in spite of sufficient service of notice. Heard Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 3. This Court vide order dated 30.06.2005 directed the parties to appear before the Marriage Counseling Cell, Udham Singh Nagar. On 19.07.2005 both the parties appeared before the Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, Udham Singh Nagar and filed the compromise deed which was duly verified by the Court. 4. It reveals that by way of this compromise both the parties have settled their dispute and have also entered into compromise to this effect that now there shall be no matrimonial dispute between them in future. 5. The Judicial Magistrate has submitted his report dated 09.01.2006 along with the photocopy of the compromise petition filed by the parties. 6. In view of the fact that both the parties have entered into compromise as well as in view of the pronouncement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi & others Vs. State of Haryana & another reported in 2003 SCC (Criminal) page 848, I come to the coclusion that there will be no justification for continuing the proceedings of criminal case No. 320 of 2004, State Vs. Ajay Dikriuj & others, under Sections 498A, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners. 7. Accordingly, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceedings of criminal case No. 320 of 2004, State Vs. Ajay Dikriuj & others, under Sections 498A, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 12.02.2008 ASWAL