JUDGMENT :

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 153/2014 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (South) for the offences under Sections 498A and 406, IPC.

2. In the present case, quashing of FIR has been sought on the basis of compromise.

3. Sweta Mangawa, respondent No. 2 is present in the Court. She has been identified by her Counsel Mr. Sneh Deep Khyalaya. Surendra Kumar petitioner No. 1 and his mother Smt. Choti Devi petitioner No. 2 are also present in the Court and they have been identified by their Counsel Mr. Vivek Choudhary.

4. Sweta Mangawa, respondent No. 2 has stated that on 8.12.2009 she was married with petitioner No. 1 as per Hindu customs and rites. It is submitted that due to difference of opinion, she was compelled to lodge the impugned FIR.

5. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that due to intervention of respectables, elders of the family and common relations, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably resolved.

6. Sweta Mangawa, respondent No. 2 has stated that the petitioner No. 1 Surendra Kumar has agreed to pay Rs. Nine Lakh and Fifty Thousands towards Stridhan, expenses on marriage, permanent alimony and cost of litigation, etc.

7. Learned Counsel for the parties have drawn attention of this Court to the compromise Annexure-2 annexed with the present petition.

8. Petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 have jointly submitted that they shall remain bound by compromise Annexure-2 affected between the parties.

9. Sweta Mangawa, respondent No. 2 has submitted that cheque of Rs. 9,50,000 has already been deposited in the Family Court No. 1, Jaipur and on the date when divorce under. Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act by way of mutual consent shall be granted, in lieu of cheque, the petitioner shall hand over Demand Draft of the said amount to her. It is submitted that the divorce petition under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act is coming for final motion in the month of April, 2019.

10. Sweta Mangawa, complainant/respondent No. 2 has prayed that the impugned FIR be quashed as she no longer intends to pursue the same.

11. The learned Counsel for the parties have jointly relied upon U.S. Joshi & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr., II (2003) SLT 689 : I (2003) DMC 524 (SC) : II (2003) CCR 57 (SC) : 2003 Cri.LJ. 2028, to contend that this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr.P.C. in furtherance of interest of justice in matrimonial dispute may bring families at peace by quashing FIR.

12. On the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the parties, in view of the judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra), relied by the parties, the present petition is accepted and impugned FIR along with all its subsequent proceedings is quashed.