CRM No. M 36245 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 36245 of 2010 Date of decision: 13.05.2011 Prashant and others ........ Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: None for the petitioners Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana for the respondent - State Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Panwar, Advocate for the complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) On 01.02.2011, the following order was passed:- “Reply on behalf of respondent No. 2 has been filed today in Court and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent states that as the matter has not been compromised, the dowry articles are yet to be handed over to respondent No. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to seek instructions in this regard. Adjourned to 13.05.2011.” Today, no one is present on behalf of the petitioners. CRM No. M 36245 of 2010 2 Reply has been filed by respondent No. 2 stating therein that the terms and conditions of the compromise have not been fully complied with and therefore, respondent No. 2 is not ready to compound the offence. In view of the above, the present petition for quashing of FIR only on the basis of compromise is not maintainable. Dismissed accordingly. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 13.05.2011 mohan