IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 260 CRM-M-56275-2023 Date of decision : 24.03.2025 Sukhdev Singh ...........Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: None fro the petitioner. Mr. Yuvraj Singh Tiwana, A.A.G., Punjab. None for respondent No.2. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.30 dated 16.02.2023 registered under Sections 494 & 498-A of IPC, 1860 at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar (Rural) (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising thereof on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure P-2) effected between the parties. 2. Vide order dated 08.05.2024, while issuing notice of motion, the parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate upto 15.07.2024 for recording their statements qua compromise. Thereafter, on 18.11.2024, the following order was passed :- “As per the report dated 06.08.2024 received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar forwarded through the office of District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar, Vinod Kothiyal 2025.03.24 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-56275-2023 2 though the statement of the parties were recorded, however, copy of the compromise deed was not presented before the trial Court. Copy of decree of divorce passed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and copy of affidavit of respondent No.2 (Annexure P-2) be presented before the trial Court on or before 20.12.2024. Thereafter, fresh statement of the parties be recorded and fresh report from the Area Magistrate be called. To await report, adjourned to 30.01.2025.” 3. In terms of order dated 18.11.2024 passed by this Court, report dated 30.01.2025 from learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar through learned District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar has been received in the Registry, wherein it has been stated that the parties neither appeared on 20.12.2024 nor at any time till 24.01.2025 before the Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner was not present on the last date of hearing i.e. 30.01.2025 and even today also the position is not different. It appears that the petitioner is not interest to further pursue the present petition. 5. In this view of the matter, the present petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 24.03.2025 (NAMIT KUMAR) kothiyal JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Vinod Kothiyal 2025.03.24 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document