Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15387 of 2011(O&M) --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15387 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: November 15, 2011 Balwinder Pal and others ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and another ....RESPONDENT(S) ***** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.208 dated 05.11.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising there from on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that on account of matrimonial discord, respondent No.2 Ajit Kaur lodged FIR against all the petitioners. Disputes have been settled. Ajit Kaur- wife and Balwinder Pal-husband are now living together. Ajit Kaur Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15387 of 2011(O&M) --2-- has been rehailitated in the matrimonial home. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 who is accompanied by respondent No.2-Ajit Kaur, states that indeed the disputes have been settled by way of compromise. Out of the wedlock there is a child aged about 3 years. Continuation of proceedings shall not only disturb the matrimonial life but shall also not allow the child to grow in a healthy environment. Ajit Kaur filed an affidavit sworn on 15.11.2011, which is taken on record. 4. Considering the fact that all the disputes have been settled and the husband and wife are living together, it would be in the interest of peace and harmony to allow the petition. 5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.208 dated 05.11.2010 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) JUDGE November 15, 2011 sonika 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?