IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 457 of 2004 Ajay Kumar S/o Sri Vijay Kumar R/o Tara Lodge, Pauri, Pauri Garhwal. ...…………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal. 2. Miss Rekha R/o Sri Ramesh Chand R/o Village Kathud, Patti Sitonsyun, Pauri Garhwal. ...…………. Respondents Mr. U.P.S. Negi, Advocate and Mr. L.K. Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate with Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for respondent No. 1 / State. Respondent No. 2 Ms. Rekha is present in person along with her counsel Mr. Tanuj Semwal, Advocate. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 575 of 2004; State Vs. Ajay Kumar and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 376, 2 120-B of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal. 3) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 2 Rekha lodged first information report (copy Annexure – 3 to the petition) stating that she got engaged with the petitioner Ajay Kumar in the year 2004. It is specifically mentioned in the first information report that the engagement ceremony was solemnized in Badrinath Dharamshala, Civil Lines, Pauri, on 14.03.2004, with fan and fair. It is also mentioned in the first information report that there after the petitioner enticed her to enter into sexual relationship, but later before the marriage the engagement broke down, due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. 4) A Compromise Application No. 414 of 2010, is moved on behalf of the petitioner and respondent No. 2, with an affidavit filed on behalf of both the parties separately, verifying the compromise. The two are present in person in the Court. They were identified by their counsel, who verified the compromise. The girl pleaded that she does not want to prosecute the boy. 5) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after going through the affidavits filed with the compromise application, this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. The 3 proceedings of Criminal Case No. 575 of 2004, State Vs. Ajay Kumar and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 376, 120-B of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, are hereby quashed. (Compromise Application No. 414 of 2010 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. April 30, 2010. H. Negi