CRM No.M-39019 of 2011 (O&M) - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-39019 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : 22.12.2011 Gulab Singh and another …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate for the petitioners. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the F.I.R. No.128 dated 20.05.2011 registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 323, 506, 120-B IPC at Police Station, Sector 5, Panchkula and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Notice of motion. Mr. Man Mohan Sikka, D.A.G., Haryana, at the asking of CRM No.M-39019 of 2011 (O&M) - 2- the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Mr. Anil Kaushik, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Parties are present in person. Earlier CRM-M No.19468 of 2011 has been filed by the same petitioners for anticipatory bail. On 20.12.2011 the following contention was noticed in that anticipatory bail:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the son of the petitioners was unable to come from Australia. Respondent No.2 is present. It has now been agreed that the petitioners will hand over the minor son Harit to respondent No.2 on the condition that she will take back the child alongwith her to Australia. In reply thereto respondent No.2 has stated that she undertakes to take the child back with her to Australia and she would have no objection if this FIR is quashed. Mr. Dinarpur undertakes that the petitioners would bring the child day after tomorrow alongwith his passport.” Today petitioner No.1 has appeared in Court alongwith the minor child named Harit alongwith his passport and both have been handed over to respondent No.2 who is also present in Court. She has assured the Court that she will be leaving for Australia CRM No.M-39019 of 2011 (O&M) - 3- alongwith the minor child in the next month because some formalities have yet to be completed. Broad guidelines have been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2007(3) R.C.R. (Crl.) 1052 for quashing the prosecution when parties entered into compromise. In the circumstances, keeping in view the order passed on 20.12.2011, the F.I.R. No.128 dated 20.05.2011 alongwith all other consequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua petitioners. Petition is allowed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) December 22, 2011 JUDGE ashish