IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Compromise Application No.78 of 2008 Compounding Application No.670 of 2008 In Criminal Misc. Application No. 181 of 2005 Vinod Kumar Agarwal and others .……… Applicants. Versus State of Uttarakhand and another .……… Respondents Mr.G.C. Lakhchura, Advocate vice Mr. Gopal Krishna, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for respondent No.1. Mr. A.K. Bist, Advocate vice Mr. Tumul Nailwal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The applicants have been summoned by the Judicial Magistrate, Khatima in complaint case filed by the respondent No.2 Smt. Shweta Agarwal u/s 498A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. Now, the parties have entered into a compromise and copy of the compromise have been filed as Annexure-1 to the compromise application No.78/2008. Thereafter, application for the compounding of the offence has been filed by the parties as application bearing No.670 of 2008. In both the applications, it has been alleged that the parties have entered into the compromise and settled their disputes outside the court, as such, they seek to quash the proceedings in view of the compromise. Learned counsel for the parties have relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and another Vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2003 p/1386 (S.C.) in which it has been stated that in matrimonial matter, if the parties have entered into compromise, the matter should be dispose of in terms of the compromise to create harmonious relation in between the parties. Taking into consideration the compounding application, the compromise application and the Apex Court judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi (Supra), the matter is liable to be disposed of in terms of the compromise as settled by the parties outside the Court. 2 In view of the above, the petition is liable to be allowed and is allowed accordingly. The compromise application and the compounding application filed by the parties are allowed and the cognizance order dated 22/04/2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Khatima and the proceedings thereof in Criminal Case No.565 of 2002, Shweta Agarwal Vs. Vishnu Kumar Agarwal and others u/s 498A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. is hereby quashed. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 26.08.2008 Shiv 3