1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Criminal Mis. Application No. 925 of 2006 1. Smt. Tulsi Devi w/o Sri Prem Singh 2. Km. Asha d/o Sri prem Singh 3. Sonu Karakoti @ Devendra Karakoti, All residents of House No. 1119/19 New Chinot Colony, near Police Chowki Raju Dairy Rohtak hariyana at present r/o 462/23 D.L.F. Colony Near Baba Banda Bahadur Gurdwara, P.S. Civil Lines, Rohtak, hariyana ………Applicants. 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Smt. Manju Devi w/o Sonu Karakoti @ Devendra Karakaoti d/o Rewat Singh R/o village Pinakot, Patwari Circle Harada, Tehsil Salt, District Almora. ……… Respondents Dated: 22.11.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri Vivek Shukla counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the respondents. By the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C the applicants have prayed for quashing of the proceedings in criminal case No. 267/2006 under section 498A, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sec ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, Patwari Circle Harada, District Almora, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet. According to the applicants, applicant no. 3 Sonu Karakoti was married with opposite party no. 2, Smt. Manju Devi in the month of February 2006. The complaint was lodged against the applicants on 29.6.2006 on the ground that the applicants are harassing Smt. Manju and treating her with cruelty for want of sufficient dowry. In view of the above, I am not observing on the merits of the controversy. The Magistrate has taken cognizance 2 under sections 498-A, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sec 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there are chances of reconciliation between the parties. The application is, therefore, disposed of finally with the direction to the applicants and the respondent no. 2 to appear before the trial Court for reconciliation. The Magistrate concerned is also directed to afford opportunity to the parties for reconciliation before proceeding with the case according to law. Subject to the observations with regard to reconciliation, application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. Rajesh Tandon, J. Dated: 22.11.2006