IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.19796 -M of 2011 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 18, 2011 HARISH KUMAR @ HAPPY ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Ishwar Lal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. AS Manaise, Advocate, for respondent No.2. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for quashing of FIR No.234 dated 10.12.2005 under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1). 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2 contend that because of a matrimonial dispute, the FIR was lodged at the instance of respondent No.2. All the disputes between the parties have been settled. So much so, decree of divorce by mutual consent has already been granted. Respondent No.2 gave statement dated 28.1.2011 before the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur. Certified copy of the statement has been produced in court today and taken on Criminal Misc. No.19796 -M of 2011 (O&M) 2 record. 3 Following are the contents of the statement made by respondent No.2:- “Petitioner no.2 is my husband. My marriage was solemnized with him on 20.8.2003 and we lived together as husband and wife at Ludhiana. No child took birth from this wedlock and due to indifferent attitude and temperaments we could not live together as husband and wife and due to the intervention of respectables we decided to broke down the marriage by mutual consent. I have received Rs.3,00,000/- (three lacs) regarding my istridhan and dowry articles. Nothing due towards my husband. I undertake to withdraw all the proceedings against my husband. I will not file any case in future against my husband regarding maintenance and dowry articles. Our marriage may be dissolved by way of decree of divorce with mutual consent.” 4 Respondent No.2-Mrs.Reetu Balal alias Ritu alias Gitanjali, as identified by her counsel Shri AS Manaise, Advocate, is present in court, and states that all her disputes with the petitioner have been settled. She has taken divorce and wants to settle in her new life. She further states that she is not ready to prosecute the petitioner. 5 Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that because the disputes have been settled by way of compromise, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR. 6 In view of the fact that respondent No.2 is not ready to prosecute the petitioner, no purpose in law will be served by Criminal Misc. No.19796 -M of 2011 (O&M) 3 continuance of proceedings. 7 The petition is, accordingly, allowed. 8 FIR No.234 dated 10.12.2005 under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings, are hereby quashed. August 18, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?