IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 28256 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 12.12.2011 Gurdeep Singh and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Rahul Rampal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A.S. Jattana, Addl.AG, Punjab for the State. Mr. Arun Gosain, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 & 3. RANJIT SINGH J. In this case, when the petitioners have approached this Court for quashing of the FIR, the Court had observed as under:- The petitioners have approached this Court for quashing of FIR No.130 dated 2.5.2002, registered under Sections 406 & 498-A IPC, at Police Station Divn. No.2, Ludhiana, on the basis of compromise. Petitioner No.1-Gurdeep Singh married respondent No.2-Balwinder Kaur. This marriage got into troubles soon thereafter and the differences arose between the couple. Ultimately, respondent No.3 filed this complaint on the basis of which the impugned FIR was registered. The respectables of both the families have intervened and wise counsel has prevailed over the parties. The parties have now compromised and settled the dispute. As per the terms of the compromise, respondent No.2 has filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of this marriage by way of mutual consent. As per the compromise, a Crl. Misc. No.M- 28256 of 2011(O&M) -2- sum of ` 2,90,000 has already been paid to respondent No.2. Another sum of `4 lacs has been handed over to the counsel appearing in the trial Court for respondent No.2 for past and future alimony. It will be appropriate that this money is also handed over to respondent No.2 so as to avoid any future complication. Both respondent Nos.2 & 3 are present in the Court. Respondent No.3-complainant has confirmed before the Court that the issue has been settled to his satisfaction. Respondent No.2 also says that she has compromised the issue with the petitioners. Both respondent Nos.2 & 3 are not any more interested in prosecuting the petitioners for the offences they had alleged in the FIR. None of the petitioners, however, is present. The petitioners at least are expected to remain present before the Court while they have prayed for quashing of the FIR. It would be appropriate to direct the petitioners to remain present before the Court on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 12.12.2011. Respondent Nos.2 & 3 need not be present on the next date of hearing. However, their counsel would have proper instructions whether a sum of `4 lacs, which has been kept with the counsel, has been handed over to them or not.” Today, the petitioners are present and the counsel for the petitioners have confirmed before me that sum of ` 4 lacs, which was kept with the counsel, has been handed over to the complainant. In view of the facts as noticed and due to the fact that the parties have now reached compromise, no useful purpose would be served in allowing this prosecution to continue. For this, this Court would have ample power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in view of ratio of law Crl. Misc. No.M- 28256 of 2011(O&M) -3- laid down in Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and others 2007(3) RCR (Cri.) 1052. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 130 dated 02.05.2002 registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at Police Station Divn. No. 2, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings against the petitioners are hereby quashed. December 12, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE