Crl. Misc. No. M-31769 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-31769 of 2011 Date of Decision : 23rd December, 2011 Daljeet Kaur .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. H. P. S. Ghumman, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. K. G. Chaudhary for the accused. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Complainant Daljeet Kaur has filed this petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short, Cr.P.C.) seeking direction to police authorities to make appropriate investigation in case FIR No.71 dated 25.08.2011 registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala under Section 306 IPC, lodged by the petitioner regarding suicide committed by her son. At the time of motion hearing on 19.10.2011, it was contended that except one accused, other accused have not been arrested. The accused in their reply brought out the fact that after lodging of FIR, the petitioner-complainant effected compromise dated Crl. Misc. No. M-31769 of 2011 -2- 09.09.2011 Annexure R-2 and also affirmed affidavit Annexure R-1 of even date and pursuant to the compromise, Ravinder Kaur one of the accused has transferred her share of the land in favour of the complainant-petitioner vide registered transfer deed dated 12/26.09.2011 without any consideration. However, the petitioner concealed all these material facts while filing the instant petition. Faced with the aforesaid situation, counsel for the petitioner on instructions from petitioner who is stated to be present in person in the Court, as also identified by ASI Lakhbir Singh, who has come to assist the State counsel in the case, seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition. Affidavit of the petitioner-complainant in this regard filed today in Court is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. In the affidavit, it has inter alia been affirmed that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the instant petition in view of the compromise. It is thus manifest that the petitioner has abused the process of this Court by invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court by way of this petition by concealment of material facts. Consequently the petition deserves to be dismissed with very heavy cost. However since the petitioner, who is a woman, has lost her young son only four months back, I am refraining from imposing cost on her but she is warned to be careful and not to abuse the process of Court. Dismissed as withdrawn. 23rd December, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) 'raj' JUDGE