IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 739/2005 Smt. Kamla Devi & Anr. …….Petitioners Versus State of Uttaranchal & Ors. …….Respondents October 29, 2009 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State/respondents no. 1 & 2. Mohd. Azim, Advocate for the respondent no. 3, Smt. Manisha Verma (complainant) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no. 1889 of 2005 (arising out of crime no. 144 of 2005), State v. Rajiv Rana & Others, relating to offences punishable under Section 406 IPC and one punishable under Section 6 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, PS Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record. Learned Counsel for the parties stated that the criminal case of which proceedings are sought to be quashed have arisen out of the matrimonial dispute. It is further stated that petitioners are in-laws of respondent no. 3 Smt. Manisha Verma, the complainant. Parties to the matrimony have entered into compromise. They have filed a joint compromise along with application no. 714 of 2009. The parties have verified this compromise. It has also been stated that proceedings of criminal complaint case no. 1889 of 2005 in respect of Mr. Rajiv Rana, husband of the complainant/respondent no. 3 (arising out of crime no. 144 of 2005), State v. Rajiv Rana & Others, relating to offences punishable under Section 406 IPC and one punishable under Section 6 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, PS Kotwali Roorkee, 2 District Haridwar pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee have already been quashed vide order dated 11.8.2009 passed by this Court on account of the compromise entered into between the complainant/respondent no. 3 and her husband Rajiv Rana. In view of principle of law laid down in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases pg. 675, this petition deserved to be allowed. In the above circumstances, the petition is allowed. The proceedings of criminal complaint case no. 1889 of 2005 in respect of the present petitioners/applicants (arising out of crime no. 144 of 2005), State v. Rajiv Rana & Others, relating to offences punishable under Section 406 IPC and one punishable under Section 6 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, PS Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee are hereby quashed. (Application No. 714 of 2009 also stands disposed of). (Dharam Veer, J.) 29.10.2009 PRABODH