Uttarakhand High Court

C482/2894/2019 of ARIF Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 20 December 2019

of 2019 With CRMA No. 4173/2019 (Compounding Application) Hon’ble N.S. Dhanik, J. Mr. M.A. Khan, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Mrs. Sheetal Selwal, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This

C482 No. 2894 of 2019 With CRMA No. 4173/2019 (Compounding Application) Hon’ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

Mr. M.A. Khan, Advocate for the applicants.

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

Mrs. Sheetal Selwal, 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 and summoning order dated 28.11.2019 passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division/J.M. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 616 of 2019, (FIR No. 272 of 2018), “State vs. Arif & others”, under Sections 498-A, 323 & 504 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division/J.M. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

In the joint compounding application, duly supported by the affidavits of all the accused applicants 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 Arif, Jarina, Mohd. Saeed & Smt. Taranum Jahan as well as the Smt. Yasmin (respondent no. 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/thumb impressions of all the accused applicants and the respondent no. 2/complainant.

Page 1 of 2

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. 616 of 2019, (FIR No. 272 of 2018), “State vs. Arif & others”, under Sections 498-A, 323 & 504 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division/J.M. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, so far it relates to the applicants only, are hereby quashed.

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

(N.S. Dhanik, J.)

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead