IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.46300-M of 2007 Date of Order: 25.03.2008 Subodh Rana & Others ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & another. ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.R.C.Dimri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Navneet Singh, AAG, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL J. Prayer in the present petition for quashing of F.I.R.No.762 dated 25.11.2003 registered against the petitioners under Sections 498-A/406 IPC at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the FIR was lodged by respondent No.2-complainant. The marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2-complainant was solemnized on 17.09.1993. Out of the wedlock, one male and one female child were born. Due to differences between the parties, divorce had taken place in 2006.The FIR in question was registered against the petitioners when the parties were living separately. However, due to intervention of the family members petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2-complainant have again re-married on 20.08.2007 and accordingly respondent no.2 who is now legally wedded wife of petitioner no.1 does not have any objection to the quashing of the proceedings initiated against the petitioners. Respondent No.2-complainant-Lajwanti Rana is present in Court in person and her statement has also been recorded separately where while admitting the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioners, she stated that she does not have any objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. Criminal Misc. No.46300-M of 2007 -2- Keeping in view the fact that respondent no.2-complainant and petitioner no.1, on account of whose differences the FIR in question was registered, have already re-married once having divorced, it would be in the fitness of things that they live peacefully in matrimonial home. Accordingly, the FIR No. 762 dated 25.11.2003 registered against the petitioners under Sections 498-A/406 IPC at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula and all subsequent proceedings thereto are quashed. The petition is disposed of. March 25, 2008 (RAJESH BINDAL) nt JUDGE