IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-7509 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: November 04, 2011 Jaspal Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Satish Bhanot, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr. R.K. Girdhar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.254 dated 13.12.2008 under Sections 323, 498-A, 406, 500, 506, 34 IPC, registered with Police Station, City, Muktsar, and consequent proceedings, on the basis of compromise. 2. In context of compromise, reference has been made to Annexure P-2 i.e. an order passed by the Judicial Crl. Misc. No. M-7509 of 2011 [2] Magistrate Ist Class, Muktsar, wherein it is recorded that disputes have been settled by way of compromise. A petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed in District Courts seeking a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The respondent-complainant has already received a sum of ` 1,75,000/- for herself and her daughter, as permanent alimony and there is nothing due against the petitioner. 3. Respondent No.2, Ravinder Kaur is present in Court in person, as identified by her counsel Mr. R.K. Girdhar, Advocate, and has filed an affidavit sworn on 19.2.2011 to the effect that compromise has been effected between the parties. Complainant and petitioner Jaspal Singh have taken divorce from the Court and in terms of compromise, the respondent-complainant does not want to take any action against the petitioner. 4. I have considered the issue. 5. FIR came to be lodged as a consequence of matrimonial disputes. Disputes have been settled and parties have decided to part ways. Divorce by way of mutual consent has already been obtained. Continuance of proceedings shall not serve any useful purpose in law in view of the stand of the respondent- complainant. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that because the parties have entered into a compromise, Crl. Misc. No. M-7509 of 2011 [3] the petition for quashing FIR is not opposed. 7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.254 dated 13.12.2008 under Sections 323, 498-A, 406, 500, 506, 34 IPC, registered with Police Station, City, Muktsar, and consequent proceedings, are hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) November 04, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?