NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

C482/1670/2019 of ANUJ SAINI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Court
Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date
2019-09-25
Bench
C ALOK KUMAR VERMA, RAMESH RANGANATHAN
Case number
442 of 2019

Parties

Cites (1 resolved of 5 detected)

Statutes cited (16)

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

C482 No. 1670 of 2019 With CRMA No. 2435/2019 (Compounding Application) Hon’ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate

for the applicants.

Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Ashish Sinha, Advocate for respondent no. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This criminal misc. application has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet dated 06.01.2019, summoning order dated 14.05.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 442 of 2019, (Case Crime No. 894/2018), under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Laksar, District Haridwar, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Laksar, District Haridwar.

In the joint compounding application, duly supported by the affidavits of accused applicant no. 1 and the respondent no. 2, it has been stated that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the respondent no. 2 do not want to prosecute the accused applicants. Accused applicants Anuj Saini, Arvind Kumar Saini, Smt. Rani as well as the no. Ayushi (respondent 2/ complainant) duly identified by their respective Counsel are present before this

Court today and they admitted that they are entered into compromise. Compounding application bears the signatures of all the accused applicants and the respondent no. 2/complainant.

In view of the above and considering the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in Narendra Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Criminal Appeal No.1498 of 2014, Manohar Singh vs. State of M.P. and another, decided on 21.7.2014 and in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the compounding application is allowed. Compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 442 of 2019, (Case Crime No. 894/2018), under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Laksar, District Haridwar, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Laksar, District Haridwar, so far it relates to the applicants only, are hereby quashed.

The C-482 application is, accordingly, disposed of.

A.kaur

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 27.08.2019