1.' 1 Slnfllel^cti IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR Cr.M.P. /2010 PETITIONERS (1) ASHISH BHAGAT, S/0 SATISH CHANDER BHAGAT, AGE 33 YRS. (ACCUSED) • (2) SMT. PRg^MILA BHAGAT, W/0 SAT1SH CHANDER BHAGAT, AGE 52 ^ YRS. .^^ -^^ <y^syf> "'^\'~>: 'o^-'' SMT MAYURAKSHI KHANNA, W/0 ROHIT KHANNA, AGE 28 YRS ^ /\^'A ALL R/0 A-801, KATYAYANI A(:>" APARTMENT, PLOT N0. 8, SECTOR 6, DWARKA, DELHI. %' v/s RESPONDENT (1) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH THANA PRABHARI, SUPELA THANA, BHILAI DISTT. DURG. (COMPLAINANT) (2) SHRUTI BHAGAT W/0 SHRI ASH1SH BHAGAT, AGE 32 YRS, R/0 1/18, PRIYADARSHINI PARISAR, EAST BHILAI, THANA SUPELA, DISTT. DURG(C.G.) PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE 1973 FOR OUA^HING THE PROCEEDINGS OF CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 213/09 AND ORDER DATED O5.f2.2009 REJECTING THE PRAYER FOR COMPUNDING THE OFFENCE IN PENDING CRIMINAL CASE N0. 09 i.e. "STATE OF C.G V/S ASHISH BHAGAT AND OTHERS' PENDING BEFORE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, DURG (C.G.) 'p-' <jz»d'-yi^lri^, t»T[TI<H<ic,Roitiy WROT^m^ .--.^^-^."^••^•^^20 i^ 3(1^91 iRcp (yii^q.g) sn^OTW Ri'fi* cWT3II$?rri>*li<b g'RnsR^ifSasii^?! SB : HOS'BLE MS. JUSTICE PtRI'nNKER DrWAKER 22.02.2010 Shri Amiva Kant Tiwari.l Bhagat, Smt.Promila Bhagat & | Shri Rajendra Tripathi, P| Shri Ali Asgar, counseil Bhaeat, The petitioners and the] person before this Court and t Tiwari, Advocate and Shri Ali Ai I,A.No.2 under Section Section 320 (5) Cr.P.C, have 4 and the respondent N0.2 for The applications have been dui} parties. It is stated that hencefij between them as they have outside the Court without any d: In view of the iudRment i B.S.Josbi & Others Vs. State SC 1386, I.A.Nos.l and 2 are al by the parties is perrmtted to The result of this iinpugned judgment and allo^ petitioners from the offences IPC 8» Section 4 of the Dowty comptfom urlder tl'l^lfcXil'l '•lllriT^ffeuB ifuit^ix iisiKlf sn^sr counsel fcr the petstioners-Ashish Smt.Mayurakshi Khanna. L. for the State/resp. No.l, tbr the resoondent No,2 Shruti respondent N0.2 are oresent in ^re identified by Shri Amiya Kanti ^ar, Advocate, respectively. |320 Cr.p.C. and I.A.No.l under ;en fiied jointiy by the petitioners p^rmission to compound the offence. supported by the affidavits of the |)rth they will not have any dispure voluntarily settled their dispute tjressure trom anyone. if the Apex Court in fhe matter of lofHaryaaa & AnotfaCT, AIR 2003 [lowed and the compromise desired belentered into, ipihsmise would be setting aside the l?ing the petition and acquit the Sections 498-A, 406/34 of the Prbhibition Act. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge