C482/383/2005 of R.N. TEWARI Vs STATE and ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALRecall Application No. 112 of 2013 Delay Condonation App. No. 1096 of 2013in

-Criminal Misc. Application (C482) No. 383 of 2005

R.N. Tewari Applicant [……. ]

versus

State of Uttaranchal & another ……. Respondents

Mr. Mohd. Umar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M.A. Khan, AGA with Ms. Mamta Bisht, AGA for respondent State. Mr. R.K.S. Verma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. K.S. Verma, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. (oral)

There is 1959 days’ delay in filing the recall / restoration application. Mr. R.K.S. Verma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. K.S. Verma, learned counsel for complainant / respondent no. 2 did not object to the same. The restoration application was also not objected. Hence, the delay condonation application CRMA No. 1096 of 2013 is allowed. Restoration / Recall Application MCRC No. 112 of 2013 is also allowed. The order dated 12.02.2008 passed by this Court is hereby recalled, on the concession granted by the other side. The application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is restored to its original number.

2) Heard learned counsel for the parties on Criminal Misc. Application (C-482) No. 383 of 2005.

3) The offence complained of against the applicant R.N. Tewari is under Section 420 of IPC. The first information report was lodged by the complainant / respondent no. 2 Vipin Kumar Goel, who is present in person before the Court today. Vipin Kumar Goel stated that he has compounded the offence complained of against the accused-applicant.

4) compounding application has been filed today in this regard by the applicant and the complainant / respondent no. 2 stating that both of them have entered into compromise and the matter has now been settled amicably between the parties. Affidavits have also been filed by the parties to this effect.

5) Complainant / respondent no. 2 Vipin Kumar Goel is identified by his counsel Mr. R.K.S.Verma, Advocate. The signatures of accused-applicant R.N. Tewari are identified his counsel Mr. Mohd. Umar, Advocate.

6) Since the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC is compoundable offence under the Scheme of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160,B.S. Joshi and others vs State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Nikhil Merchant vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008 AIR SCW 7501,has permitted

compounding of such offence, therefore, compounding application is allowed in the interest of justice.

7) In view of the above, the application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Summoning order dated 01.10.1988, issued against the applicant by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karanprayag, District Chamoli, in criminal case no. 29 of 1991, under Section 420 of IPC, registered with police station Karanprayag, as well as the entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed.

(U.C. Dhyani, J.)

Dt. August 01, 2013. Negi