IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 266 of 2011 In Compounding Application No. 1479 of 2011 1. Mr. Surya Prakash Gupta S/o Late Shri Jagannath Prasad Gupta R/o 6/874, Anand Bagh, Talla Gorakhpur Haldwani, P.S. Haldwani District Nainital (Uttarakhand) 2. Smt.Mithlesh Kumari Gupta W/o Shri Surya Prakash Gupta R/o 6/874, Anand Bagh, Talla Gorakhpur Haldwani, P.S. Haldwani District Nainital (Uttarakhand) 3. Shri Rajesh Gupta S/o Shri Surya Prakash Gupta R/o 6/874, Anand Bagh, Talla Gorakhpur Haldwani, P.S. Haldwani District Nainital (Uttarakhand) 4. Shri Gopal Gupta S/o Shri Surya Prakash Gupta R/o 6/874, Anand Bagh, Talla Gorakhpur Haldwani, P.S. Haldwani District Nainital (Uttarakhand) ………………............Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through secretary (Home) Secretariat Complex, Dehradun District Dehradun 2. Smt Rekha Gupta W/o Shri Pankaj Gupta D/o Pitambar Dayal Gupta 2 R/o Mil Road, Doiwala P.S Doiwala District Dehradun ………….........Respondents Shri D.K.Sharma, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Shri B.S.Parihar, Brief Holder, present for the state. Shri Manish Arora, Advocate, present for respondent no.2/complainant Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. (2) By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10100 of 2010, State vs. Pankaj Gupta and others, relating to offences punishable under section 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of I.P.C., and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Dehradun. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted before this court that parties to 3 matrimony have already entered into compromise, as such, the respondent no.2 does not want to prosecute the petitioners, and her husband Pankaj Gupta. A Compounding Application No. 1479 of 2011 has also been moved jointly by the petitioners and respondent no.2, supported by affidavits of petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2. (4) Respondent no.2 Smt Rekha Gupta, identified by her counsel Shri Manish Arora, Advocate, is present in person in the court, and she verified the fact that she has entered into compromise with her husband and in laws, and she does not want to prosecute them. (5) In the above circumstances, in view of the Principle of law laid down in B.S.Joshi Vs. State of Haryana (2003) 4SCC page 675, the petition deserves to be allowed. (6) Accordingly, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10100 of 2010, State vs. 4 Pankaj Gupta and others, relating to offences punishable under section 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of I.P.C., and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Dehradun, are hereby quashed against the petitioners and also against the Pankaj Gupta. (Compounding Application No. 1479 of 2011 stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.13.12.2011 N.P