IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.21407 -M of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : JULY 28, 2011 ANIL KUMAR ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjay Tangri, Advocate, for respondent No.2. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing of FIR No.59 dated 13.6.2009 under Sections 498-A, 406, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sadar Machhiwara, Police District Khanna (Annexure P-8). 2 Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that cancellation report has been prepared and would be filed as and when complainant/respondent No.2 appears along with the Investigating Officer before the concerned Magistrate. 3 Learned counsel for respondent No.2 assures the court that on receipt of a communication from the Investigating Officer to appear before the concerned Magistrate, the complainant would appear before the Magistrate. Criminal Misc. No.21407 -M of 2010 (O&M) 2 4 At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent- State contends that the cancellation report would be filed on 6.9.2011. 5 Learned counsel for respondent No.2 contends that complainant/respondent No.2 shall remain present in the court of the concerned Magistrate on 6.9.2011. 6 In view of the fact that cancellation report has been prepared by the Investigating Agency, this petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. 7 It is, however, made clear that the complainant/ respondent No.2 would have the liberty to file a protest petition and take any other alternate remedy, as provided by law, and as the facts and circumstances of the case require. July 28, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?