Criminal Misc. No. M-10591 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. M-10591 of 2009 Date of Decision: 7.5.2009 Deepak Kumar Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Jitender Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr. U.S. Dhaliwal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1-State. Mr. Kanwarpal Singh Gogia, Advocate for respondent No.2. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) A short reply by way of affidavit of Savita wife of Deepak Kumar Sharma, respondent No.2, has been filed and the same is taken on record. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 191 dated 29.9.2006 registered at Police Station Salem Tabri, Ludhiana, under Sections 406, 498-A & 506 IPC. In the present case, FIR was lodged by Savita, respondent No.2-estranged wife. She has stated in the FIR that her marriage was performed with Deepak Kumar Sharma, petitioner, on 18.10.1999. In her Criminal Misc. No. M-10591 of 2009 2 matrimonial home, she gave birth to two female child. It is further stated in the FIR that due to greed of dowry, she was harassed and maltreated by petitioner Deepak Kumar Sharma and his family members. Quashing of the FIR has been sought on basis of compromise on the ground that both petitioner and respondent No.2 have resumed their matrimonial relationship. It is stated that Savita, respondent No.2, had filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance to her and to her minor daughters namely, Muskan and Khushi. The matter was listed before the Lok Adalat. The order of Lok Adalat has been annexed with the present petition as Annexure P3. Respondent No.2 Savita is present in the Court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr. Kanwarpal Singh Gogia, Advocate. She has stated that she has been blessed with two daughters namely, Muskan and Khushi, aged seven & six years, respectively. From 23.6.2008, the parties are happily residing along with their children. It is stated that present FIR is an obstacle in continuation of matrimonial life of petitioner and respondent No.2. Therefore, the present FIR is liable to be quashed. It has been held by Hon'ble the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana 2003 (2) RCR (Criminal) 888 that compromise not only promotes peace in the society but also saves parties from litigation. The view has been further reiterated by a Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2007(3) Recent Criminal Reports 1052. In view of the law laid down in B.S.Joshi's case (supra) and Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), the compromise arrived at between Criminal Misc. No. M-10591 of 2009 3 the parties, present petition is accepted and impugned FIR along with all consequential proceedings is quashed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 7, 2009 “DK”