IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.23497-M of 2009 Date of Decision:28.9.2010 Viraj and others .... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise. Accordingly, notice of motion was issued. On 30.4.2010, Mr. Vipul Bishnoi, Advocate, who had put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2 was directed to file affidavit of respondent No.2 and the parties were also directed to be present in the Court for 24.5.2010. However, on 24.5.2010, it was noticed that neither the complainant nor the counsel for the complainant was present and nor any affidavit was filed. Situation remained the same on 22.7.2010. Today also, no one is present on behalf of respondent No.2- complainant. In view of the fact that neither the complainant nor the counsel for the complainant is present and nor any affidavit is filed to corroborate the fact that the matter has been compromised, the present petition on the basis of compromise cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. However, in case, respondent No.2-complainant comes forward to corroborate the averments made in the petition, the petitioners are at liberty to file fresh petition. 28.9.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE