AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.
2 By means of this petition moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioners have sought a direction for quashing the first information report dated 30.05.2011 registered as case crime No. 138 of 2011, relating to offences punishable u/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and one u/s 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 police station Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Respondent No. 3 state that parties to the matrimony have entered into compromise. Complainant Savita and her daughter Prerna alias Seema are present in person in the court, who are identified by their counsel. They affirmed before this Court that they do not want to prosecute one Mr. Amit Kumar and the Petitioners. Counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 3 in which the fact relating to compromise is affirmed. Copy of the compromise is annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition.
In view of law laid down in B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another, , this writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. The first information report dated 30.05.2011 registered as case crime No. 138 of 2011, relating to offences punishable u/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and one u/s 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 police station Gangnahar Roorkee, District Haridwar is hereby quashed. (Stay application No. 5519 of 2011 stands disposed of).