IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. 43305-M of 2006 DATE OF DECISION : 15.12.2006 Ajay Singal and others .... PETITIONERS Versus State of Haryana and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr.K.S.Ahluwalia, Mr. J.S. Rattu & Mr. Baljit Puri, Advocates, for the petitioners. Mr. Partap Singh, Senior DAG, Haryana. Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent No.2. * * * The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of case FIR No. 114 dated 10.6.2005 registered at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC. In pursuance of the notice issued by this Court, respondent No.2-complainant has appeared and she has made the following statement :- “ My marriage with petitioner No. 1 Ajay Singal was solemnized on 7.3.2003. From our marriage, one daughter was born to me, who is living with me. Thereafter, due to the harassment caused to me by my husband and his family members, I was compelled to lodge FIR No. 114 dated 10.6.2005 registered at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC. During the pendency of the case, with the intervention of the family Crl. Misc. No. 43305-M of 2006 -2- members and friends, the matter has been compromised. In pursuance of the said compromise, petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent was filed by us. The Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, vide judgment and decree dated 25.11.2006 has passed the decree of divorce by mutual consent. I am filing photo copy of the decree and it be taken on record. As per the compromise, I will keep my daughter with me. Every thing has been settled. Now nothing is due against petitioner No.1. I have no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed.” The aforesaid statement of the complainant has been counter-signed by her counsel. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the aforesaid statement made by respondent No.2-complainant and the settlement arrived at between the parties, I am of the opinion that since the parties have compromised the matter and the marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has already been dissolved, therefore, no useful purpose will be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings in the instant FIR and it will be futile because respondent No.2-complainant is not going to support the prosecution case. I am satisfied that the settlement arrived at between the parties is bonafide. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid statement of respondent No.2- complainant, the fact that the parties have compromised the matter and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, JT 2003 (3) SC 277, FIR No. 114 dated 10.6.2005 registered at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC and all the proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Petition is accordingly allowed. December 15, 2006 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE