IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.31790 -M of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : MARCH 31, 2010 HARPREET SINGH & ORS. ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. PS Paul, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. MS Bajwa, Advocate, for respondent No.2. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed for quashing of case FIR No.249 dated 16.12.2007 under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Division 'B', Amritsar (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 contend that there were temperamental differences between Manpreet Kaur (respondent No.2/complainant) and Harpreet Singh (petitioner No.1) and on account of these matrimonial differences, the FIR came to be lodged. All the disputes have been amicably settled. So much so, both the parties approached the court having competent jurisdiction under Section 13-B of Criminal Misc. No.31790 -M of 2009 2 the Hindu Marriage Act. The marriage has been dissolved by virtue of a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 contends that, indeed, all the disputes have been settled amicably. Respondent No.2 has received a sum of Rs.3 lacs in settlement of all her claims arising out of the matrimony. Respondent No.2 does not want to prosecute the petitioners any more and wants to live in peace. Considering the nature of offences; the fact that respondent No.2 has received money in settlement of all her claims; respondent No.2 does not want to prosecute the petitioners and being the victim, would be the most relevant witness, and no useful purpose, in law, would be served by continuance of the proceedings, the petition is allowed. FIR No.249 dated 16.12.2007 under Sections 323, 406, 498- A, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Division 'B', Amritsar (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed. March 31, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?