IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-3979 of 2010 (O & M) Date of Decision: July 18, 2011 Chand Rani & others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Saurav Khurana, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr. Sandeep S. Majithia, Advocate, for respondent No.2. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing FIR No.159 dated 9.10.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC registered with Police Station, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2); judgment dated 13.2.2009 (Annexure P-3) passed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for grant of decree of Crl. Misc. No. M-3979 of 2010 [2] divorce by mutual consent; and affidavit of petitioner No.3 (Annexure P-5). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that a bare perusal of the judgment rendered by the District Judge, Hoshiarpur (dated 13.2.2009, Annexure P-3) would make it evident that respondent No.2, complainant, stated on oath before that Court that all the civil and criminal proceedings shall be withdrawn. In such circumstances, continuance of these proceedings shall result in abuse of process of law and process of Court. 3. I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel. 4. In judgment dated 13.2.2009 (Annexure P-3), the following has been recorded:- “.....That all the matters pertaining to permanent alimony, dowry articles and Istri Dhan have already been mutually settled and nothing is due against Party No.1 i.e. Sunil Jain and it is also mutually settled that if there is any civil or criminal case or complaint pending in any court or criminal case or complaint pending in any court or authority that would be withdrawn by them.....” 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2, complainant has not been able to controvert the fact that statement was indeed given by respondent No.2. 6. In the face of above admitted fact, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners would result in abuse of process of law and process of Court. Respondent-complainant, in the Court Crl. Misc. No. M-3979 of 2010 [3] of District Judge, Hoshiarpur, gave a statement on oath that proceedings would be withdrawn as no dispute remains pending and disputes have been settled in regard to Istri Dhan, Dowry Articles etc. 7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.159 dated 9.10.2008 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC registered with Police Station, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, is hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) July 18, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?