Crl. Misc. No.29915 of 2011 in/and Crl. Misc. No. M-34220 of 2010 {1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.29915 of 2011 in/and Crl. Misc. No. M-34220 of 2010 Date of decision:- 31.05.2011 Rakesh Kumar @ Laddi ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Rajeev Dev Sharma, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. Raghbir Chaudhary, Sr. DAG, Punjab RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C for recalling the order dated 06.05.2011, vide which this Court had dismissed the petition filed by the applicant-petitioner. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 06.05.2011, he could not appear on account of death of his father-in-law on 05.05.2011, so, he could not make a request for adjournment either personally or through somebody. Due to this reasons, he could not assist the Court and the said petition was dismissed by this Court on 06.05.2011. Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Goldi @ Kulvinder vs. State of Haryana and others, 2001 (1) R.C.R (Criminal) 371 to contend that in similar circumstances, one couple had married each other by running away from the house and got a child from the said wedlock. This Court had quashed the proceedings initiated in FIR under Section 363 and 366 IPC and it was observed that continuation of criminal Crl. Misc. No.29915 of 2011 in/and Crl. Misc. No. M-34220 of 2010 {2} proceedings would jeopardize their married life. In the present case, the petitioner and prosecutrix, Preeti married are blessed with the child and further the prosecutrix is now major. So, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that continuation of the proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and would jeopardize their married life. He has further submitted that their case is fully covered by the above said judgment, therefore, the instant case may kindly be disposed of in the same terms. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the earlier order passed by this Court dated 06.05.2011 is hereby recalled. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and F.I.R No. 55 dated 01.07.2008 under Section 363, 366 IPC, registered at Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh, Pathankot, District Gurdaspur is quashed with all consequential proceedings. May 31, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) G.Arora JUDGE