IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Recall / Restoration Appn. 278 of 2010 Compounding Appn. No. 409 / 2010 In Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 417 of 2005 Sanu Tandon S/o Late Shyam Narayan Tandon R/o Lal Kurti, Ishwar Nagar, Near Amar Ujala Press, Agra. ...…………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Pooja D/o Sri Prem Nath Kapoor R/o Upper Bazar, Sri Nagar (Garhwal), Uttaranchal. ...…………. Respondents Mr. Subhash Chandra Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Mamta Bisht, A.G.A. for respondent No. 1 / State. Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2 / complainant. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. This is Recall / Restoration MCRC Application No. 278 of 2010, moved on behalf of the petitioner, for restoration of Criminal Misc. Application (C-482) No. 417 of 2005, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 22.04.2009. 2 The application is accompanied with Delay Condonation Application No. 408 of 2010 and the affidavit. 2) Heard. 3) The Delay condonation application is allowed. Delay is condoned. 4) Also, Recall / Restoration MCRC Application No. 278 of 2010 is allowed. 5) The petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) is restored to its original number on the condition that parties shall argue the case, today itself. 6) Also, heard on the petition moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 7) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that parties to the matrimony have entered into compromise. They further state that Sanu Tandon (husband) and Pooja (respondent No. 2) are present in person in the Court. The two verified the compromise filed before this Court today. The compromise is supported by affidavit filed by complainant Pooja. It is stated by her that now she is peacefully living with her husband and does not want to prosecute the petitioner. 3 8) Therefore, in view of the principle of law laid down in B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed. 9) Therefore, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 281 of 2005; State Vs. Sanu Tandon and others, relating to offence punishable under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Srinagar (Garhwal), are hereby quashed. (Compounding Application No. 409 of 2010 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. April 28, 2010. H. Negi 4