Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, J. - (1.) THE Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482, Cr PC for quashing of the FIR dated 7.11.2001, registering against them under Sections 498 -A/406 and 34, IPC.
(2.) THIS FIR was registered at the instance of Respondent No. 2 Smt. Daljeet Kaur, who is wife of Petitioner No. 1. Copy of the compromise is annexed with the petition as Annexure P -2. The counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2 has disclosed in the reply that the compromise, on the basis of which the quashing is sought, has not materialised. It is stated to be a paper transaction only. It is further stated that the Petitioners have succeeded in getting the compromise signed by playing fraud upon Respondent No. 2 and she has withdrawn from the said compromise. It is further disclosed that she never made a statement before the Court where the proceedings under Section 13 -B of the Hindu Marriage Act were pending. The said petition statedly was also dismissed. Accordingly, it is pleaded that there is no compromise Hence the present FIR cannot be ordered to be quashed on the basis of compromise (Annexure P -2). Faced with this situation, learned Counsel for the Petitioners has referred to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Shamim v. Smt. Nahid Begum, : AIR 2005 SC 757: 2005 (1) All India Criminal LR (SC) 875 and Ruchi Agarwal v. Amit Kumar Agarwal, : 2005 (3) SCC 299: 2005 (1) All India Criminal LR (SC) 155. In both the cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court took a view that where the wife had acted on the part of a compromise and had not withdrawn the criminal proceedings subsequent thereto, then it would amount to abuse of process of Court. That does not appear to be a situation in the present case. The wife apparently has not taken any advantage of the compromise. She has, at very beginning, resiled from this compromise due to alleged fraud. Learned Counsel has also drawn my attention to the fact that the Respondent wife had made a statement before the matrimonial Court that she had received all dowry articles. The statement, allegedly made, would be of no avail to the Petitioners as the petition under Section 13 -B of the Hindu Marriage Act has already been dismissed. Even taking note of that stage of the proceedings, the impugned FIR cannot be ordered to be quashed on the basis of compromise. The present is accordingly dismissed.;