IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Miscellaneous Application No. 755 of 2011 Urgency Application No. 3567 of 2011 In CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 47 of 2011 Narain Penuli S/o Shri Sureshanand R/o 3/2 Araghar, P.S. Dalanwala, District Dehradun ………………..Applicant Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary (Home), Secretariat, Uttarakhand, Dehradun 2. Smt Preeti Penuli W/o Shri Narain Penuli R/o 5-A, Teg Bahadur Road House No. 5/35 Hydel Colony P.S.Dalanwala, District Dehradun ………….Opposite parties Shri R.P.Nautiyal, Advocate, present for the petitioner Smt. Mamta Bisht, A.G.A.,present for the State. Notices were personally served on respondent no.2, but none present on her behalf. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J 2 Heard. (2) By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 293 of 2010, State of Uttarakhand vs. Narain Painuli, relating to offences punishable under section 498A and 506 of I.P.C, and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Dalanwala, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that parties to matrimony have entered into compromise, and they have decided to get quashed the proceedings of the aforesaid case. Attention of this court is drawn to certified copy of decree passed by Principal Judge Family Court, Dehradun, in Suit No. 251 of 2010, Narain Painuly vs. Preeti Painuly which was decided by said court in terms of compromise 21A. Certified copy of said decree alongwith the compromise is annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit filed with the Criminal Misc. Application No. 755 of 2011. The compromise entered between the parties to the matrimony clearly indicates that the respondent no.2 does not want to prosecute the petitioner, and she has agreed to get the 3 case in question, quashed. Another compromise to the same effect dated 18.02.2011, is also on the record, which is annexed as Annexure -2 to the petition. (4) In the above circumstances, in view of principle of law laid down in B.S.Joshi Vs. State of Haryana (2003) 4SCC page 675, this petition deserves to be allowed. (5) Accordingly, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 293 of 2010, State of Uttarakhand vs. Narain Painuli, relating to offences punishable under section 498A and 506 of I.P.C, and one punishable under section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Dalanwala, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, are hereby quashed. (Urgency Application No. 3567 of 2011 and Criminal Misc. Application No. 755 of 2011, stand disposed of ). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.23.09.2011 N.P 4