IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.35057-M of 2007 Date of decision: 8th April, 2010 Kaka Ram and another … Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manish Deswal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. Arvind Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that FIR No.228 dated 12.12.2006 registered at Police Station Cheeka, District Kaithal under Sections 406, 498-A IPC be quashed, as petitioner No.1 is elder brother of husband of the complainant and petitioner No.2 is wife of petitioner No.1. It is stated that the brother of petitioner No.1 was married with the complainant about 20 years ago and there are no specific allegations against the petitioners in the FIR (Annexure P-1). However, after the FIR was investigated, a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted and the same is not before this Court. Therefore, this Court cannot comment upon the statements made by the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Criminal Misc. No.35057-M of 2007 At this stage, Mr.Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate appearing for the petitioners, has stated that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to raise all arguments, available to him under law, before the trial Court at an appropriate stage. As prayed, dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty aforesaid. In the present case, FIR was lodged in the month of December, 2006. Therefore, taking into consideration the peculiar facts of the case and long pendency of the litigation, personal appearance of the petitioners before the trial Court is exempted, subject to their filing an undertaking that they shall cause their appearance as and when required by the trial Court. They shall also undertake that the evidence, if any, recorded in their absence but in the presence of their counsel, shall be binding upon them. The trial Court may incorporate any other condition in the undertaking to be furnished by the accused. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE April 8, 2010 rps 2