CRM No.M-20339 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No.M-20339 of 2009 Date of Decision: 03.03.2010 Aabida ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana etc. ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Sunil Saharan, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 to 4 for registration of FIR against respondents No.5 to 15 under Sections 366, 363, 376 and 120-B of IPC on account of commission of cognizable offence of committing rape on the petitioner by respondents No.5 to 7 in connivance with respondents No.8 to 15. In this regard, the petitioner has filed representation P-1 before Superintendent of Police, District Mewat (Nuh). Notice of motion was issued. An adjournment was being sought by learned counsel for the petitioner on one pretext or the other. Finally, on 20.01.2010, learned CRM No.M-20339 of 2009 2 counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner stated that he has no instructions from his client to pursue this petition. Accordingly, the notice was issued to the petitioner for 10.03.2010. The said notice was ordered to be served upon the petitioner through Superintendent of Police, Mewat. Upon service, Criminal Misc. No.10779 of 2010 was moved by the petitioner for permission to withdraw the petition by preponing the date from 10.03.2010. An affidavit of the petitioner has also been filed in support of the said application stating therein that she was living happily with respondent No.5 and thus, she did not wish to pursue the present petition and the same be dismissed as withdrawn so that she and respondent No.5 may live peacefully and happily. Taking into account the allegations made by the petitioner in her petition and the representation P-1, the prayer made through the application deserves to be dismissed, except for the reply, filed by the State. As per the reply filed by the State, the petitioner had never appeared before them for filing of the complaint. On account of her different stand in Crl. Misc. No.16977 of 2009 claiming for protection, no FIR has been registered till date. Accordingly, the present petition, besides having resulted in wasting the valuable time of the Court, is a misuse of the process of law. The same is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn with Rs.15,000/- as costs, to be paid to the “State Legal Services Authority, Haryana”. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 03.03.2010 JUDGE gurpreet