IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION No. 237 Of 2003 1. Vishwajeet S/O Gyan Chand R/O N-211, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar 2. Gyan Chand S/O Data Ram R/O N-211, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar, 3. Smt Shakuntala, W/O Gyan Chand, R/O N-211, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar. 4. Tilak Vashisht S/O P.C Vashisht R/O 268, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar 5. Sanjay Kumar S/O S.B.Sharma R/O 379, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar 6. Smt. Bina, D/O Gyan Chand W/O Tilak Vashisht R/O Q-68, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar 7. Smt. Renu, D/O Gyan Chand W/O Sanjay Sharma R/O 379, Shivalik Nagar, B.H.E.L, Ranipur, Haridwar 8. Smt. Mamta, D/O Gyan Chand W/O Sanjay Upadhyay R/O C/O S.K Gupta Near shiv Mandir Saraswati Vihar Dehradun 9. Sanjay Upadhyay S/O Nanak Chand, R/O C/O S.K Gupta Near shiv Mandir Saraswati Vihar Dehradun ……………. Petitioners 2 Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Chief Judicial Magistrate Haridwar, District Haridwar 3. District & Sessions Judge Haridwar District Haridwar 4. Jag Mohan Sharma S/o Late Sita Ram R/O Mohalla Dat Mandi Jwalapur P.S. Jwalapur District Haridwar ………….. Respondents Shri Navneet Kaushik, Advocate present for the petitioners Shri M.A.Khan, Brief Holder present for the State/respondent no.1 Shri Arvind Vashisht, Advocate,present for respondent no.4/complainant Parties to matrimony namely Vishwajeet (petitioner no.1) and his wife Sarika (daughter of respondent no.4) are present in person. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties, and also parties present in person. (2) By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashing of the order dated 28.02.2003, passed by Chief Judicial, Magistrate, Haridwar, (in criminal case no. 978 of 2003), and order dated 24.09.2003, passed by Sessions Judge Haridwar (in criminal revision no. 383 of 2003). (3) By order dated 28.02.2003, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, the petitioners have been summoned as accused in criminal case no.978 of 2003, relating to offences punishable under section 326, 504, 506, 498A, I.P.C and one punishable 3 under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar. By order dated 24.09.2003, passed in criminal revision no.383 of 2007, Sessions Judge Haridwar, has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners. (4) Learned counsel for the parties drew attention of this court to the fact that parties to the matrimony have entered into compromise on 18.03.2009, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure 1 with the affidavit dated 15th of February 2010, filed in this petition. In terms of said compromise the parties to the matrimony have agreed that the husband shall pay Rs. 5 lakhs through bank draft (which has been got prepared in the form of bank draft no. 955863) to his wife. It has been further agreed upon that Vishwajeet (husband/petitioner no.1) shall deposit Rs. 2 Lakh in fixed deposit F.D.R (which has been deposited in the form of F.D.R No. 818901) in favour of the minor daughter of the couple. Now the dispute between the parties relates only to the visiting rights to meet the child. In terms of compromise, earlier Sarika (wife of petitioner no.1) had agreed to part with the company of the child reserving her visiting rights. (5) Before this court parties to the matrimony verified said compromise and wanted a change in it that the custody of the child (named Khushi) be permitted to remain with the mother of the child with the condition that the school fee of the child shall be borne by the father and he shall have visiting rights to meet his daughter on school days (for half an hour), after the 4 school is over, and also on Sundays (for one hour). Smt Sarika (wife of petitioner no1) told that she is paying Rs. 1400/- per month as fee of the child. Both the parties agreed that the husband shall pay Rs. 1500/- per month in future from the next month till the studies of the child are over. (6) In terms, as agreed above, between the parties to the matrimony, the matter has been settled amicably. (7) Therefore, in view of principle of law laid down in B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana (2003) 4 S.C.C, page 675 the impugned criminal proceedings of criminal case no 978 of 2003 State vs. Smt. Bina and others relating to offences punishable under section 326, 504, 506, 498A, and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, police station Ranipur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, are hereby quashed. The petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C stands allowed. The draft and F.D.R are handed over to the wife of petitioner no.1 with the further understanding that the petitioner no.1 shall write to the bank concerned requesting that Smt. Sarika (wife) may withdraw the amount on behalf of the minor daughter. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.19.4.2010 N.P 5