IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 448 of 2011 with Compounding Application No. 541 of 2011 Saumitra @ Sumit Dhiman S/o Shri Brij Bhushan Dhiman R/o Mohalla Kambiyan, Kasba & Thana Bhawan, District Muzaffarnagar (U.P) ………………..Applicant Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary, Home Civil, Secretariat Dehradun. 2. Smt Anand Bharti W/o Shri Saumitra @ Sumit Dhiman D/o Late Gopal Dhiman R/o Peeth Bazar, Jwalapur Thana Jwalapur, Dist Hardwar ………….Opposite parties Shri Pawan Mishra, Advocate, present for the petitioner Shri Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, present for the respondent no.2 Shri B.S.Parihar, Brief Holder, present for the State. Petitioner Saumitra @ Sumit Dhiman and respondent no.2 Smt. Anand Bharti are also present in person, identified by their counsel. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J Heard. 2 (2) By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4595 of 2008, State vs. Saumitra @ Sumit Dhiman and others relating to offence punishable under section 498A I.P.C, and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar. (3) Learned counsel for the State states that the parties to matrimony have entered into compromise, and respondent no.2 does not want to prosecute the case further. Both husband and wife are present in person, and verified the fact and that they have entered into compromise and they are living together. A Compounding Application No. 541 of 2011 has been moved before this court along with affidavit filed by respondent no.2 (wife). (4) In view of principle of law laid down in B.S.Joshi Vs. State of Haryana (2003) 4SCC page 675, this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the compounding application no. 541 of 2011 is allowed. The petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is also allowed. The 3 proceedings of of Criminal Case No. 4595 of 2008, State vs. Saumitra @ Sumit Dhiman and others relating to offence punishable under section 498A I.P.C, and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar, are hereby quashed, as against all the accused. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.25.05.2011 N.P