IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Compounding Application No.856 of 2008 In Criminal Misc. Application No. 303 of 2007 Rajesh Kumar ……. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …… Respondents Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. 2. This petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing and setting the impugned summoning order dated 06/03/2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Roorkee, District Haridwar in case No.42 of 2007, Smt. Kiran Lata Vs. Rajesh Kumar u/s 406 I.P.C., police station Kotwali Gangnehar Roorkee, District Haridwar. 3. A complaint was filed before the trial court in which it has been alleged that marriage of the petitioner Rajesh Kumar and the respondent No.2 Smt. Kiran Lata was solemnized on 19/02/2002. During the marriage, household goods were given to the petitioner. The respondent No.2 was harassed; beaten and thereafter she left the house due to the cruelty committed upon her in connection with the dowry demand. The petitioner did not return the said household goods given at the time of marriage. Thereafter, cognizance was taken by the learned trial court u/s 406 I.P.C. 4. The cognizance order 06/03/2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Roorkee, District Haridwar in case No.42 of 2007, Smt. Kiran Lata Vs. Rajesh Kumar u/s 406 I.P.C., police station Kotwali Gangnehar Roorkee, District Haridwar was challenged before this court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 5. During the course of the hearing of this petition, both the parties have filed the compromise application wherein it has been alleged that they have settled their dispute outside the court. Both the parties have filed affidavit alongwith the compounding application before this court. Mr. Manish Arora, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjeev Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 stated before the Court that they verify this fact. They have further stated that the parties have entered into amicable settlement outside the court and there is no further dispute between the parties. 6. Considering that the parties have entered into an amicable settlement and the husband and wife are living happily, no useful purpose will be served to prolong the pendency of the case. This is also the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and other Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2003 SCC (Cri) p/848. 7. Considering the above facts and the principles laid down by the Apex Court, the further proceedings in case No.42 of 2007, Smt. Kiran Lata Vs. Rajesh Kumar u/s 406 I.P.C., police station Kotwali Gangnehar Roorkee, District Haridwar is hereby quashed in view of the compromise 8. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 22.10.2008 Shiv