C482/54/2011 of KISHAN LAL TAANK AND ORS Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR

Court: Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date: 2011-09-26
Bench: DEHRADUN, FAMILY COURT, KAMLA DEVI, MUKESH TAANK, PRINCIPAL JUDGE, RAKESH TAANK
Case number: 2

Parties

Chukhuwala, Police Station Kotwali Dehradun (PETITIONER)
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary HomeCivil Secretariat, Uttarakhand, DehradunCivil Secretariat, Uttarakhand, Dehradun (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1 resolved of 2 detected)

B.S. JOSHI AND ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. (2003)

Statutes cited (3)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Miscellaneous Application(C482) No. 54 of 2011

1.Kishan Lal Taank, S/o Shri Nanak Chand

2.Smt. Kamla Devi, W/o Shri Kishan Lal Taank

3.Rakesh Taank, S/o Shri Kishan Lal Taank

4.Mukesh Taank, S/o Shri Kishan Lal Taank

5.Nirdesh Taank, S/o Shri Kishan Lal TaankAll R/o H.No. 292, Block-III, Indira ColonyAll R/o H.No. 292, Block-III, Indira Colony

Chukhuwala, Police Station Kotwali Dehradun

Versus

…..…Petitioners

1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary HomeCivil Secretariat, Uttarakhand, DehradunCivil Secretariat, Uttarakhand, Dehradun

2. Smt. Rajni, W/o Shri Dinesh TaankD/o Shri Suresh, at present residing atVillage Bhaniawala, Police Station DoiwalaDistrict Dehradun D/o Shri Suresh, at present residing atVillage Bhaniawala, Police Station DoiwalaDistrict Dehradun

……….Respondents

Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate, present for the petitioners.Mrs. Mamta Bisht, A.G.A., present for the State.Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, present for the respondent no. 2.

Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Heard.

2.By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case no.

437 of 2010, State vs. Kishan Lal Taank & others, relating to offences punishable under section 498A, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, and one punishable under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Doiwala, pending in the court of I[st ]Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 state that parties to matrimony have entered into compromise. compromise has been filed alongwith application before this Court. Parties to matrimony namely respondent no. 2 Rajni and Dinesh (husband) are present in the court identified by their counsel. They verified the compromise. Smt. Rajni (respondent no. 2) told this Court that she does not want to prosecute the accused including petitioners Kishan Lal Taank, Smt. Kamla Devi, Rakesh Taank, Mukesh Taank, Nirdesh Taank. It is also pointed out that suit no. 342 of 2010, which was filed before, Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, by Dinesh Taank against respondent no. 2 has has also been compromised. Certified copy of order dated 05.05.2011, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, is

annexed as Annex. 1 to the petition filed with the compromise .

4.In the above circumstances, in view of principle of law laid down in B.S. Joshi vs State of Haryana (2003) 4SCC page 675, the petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., deserves to be allowed. The petition under section 482 Cr.P.C, is allowed. The proceedings of criminal case no. 437 of 2010, State vs. Kishan Lal Taank & others, relating to offences punishable under section 498A, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, and one punishable under section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Doiwala, pending in the court of I[st] Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, against all the accused are hereby quashed.

Parul

(Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 26.09.2011