Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15222 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15222 of 2011 Date of Decision : 5th October, 2011 Manoj Kumar & another .... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr. P. K. Longia, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Anupam Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Advocate for respondent No.2-complainant. * * * * L.N.MITTAL, J. (ORAL) Manoj Kumar and his father Ram Lal have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr. P.C.), for quashing FIR No.35 dated 15.01.2011 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406, 498-A, 323, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Ambala Cantt., District Ambala, in view of compromise (Annexure P-2) effected with respondent No.2-complainant. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant states that parties have effected compromise Annexure P-2 and, therefore, respondent No.2-complainant has no objection to the quashing of the impugned FIR . It is also stated by counsel for both the parties that pursuant to compromise, marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has since been dissolved by decree of divorce by mutual consent and requisite amount has since been paid by the petitioners to respondent No.2. Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-15222 of 2011 -2- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 of Cr. P. C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (2) Law Herald (Punjab & Haryana) 2205. In the instant case, FIR is result of matrimonial dispute between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2-complainant. However, their marriage has since been dissolved by decree of divorce pursuant to compromise. Necessary amount has also been paid to respondent No.2-complainant by the petitioners. Accordingly, it is fit case in which FIR should be quashed. In view of the aforesaid, instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR Annexure P-1 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising threfrom. ( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE 5th October, 2011 'raj'