High CourtsSingle Bench

Anuj Kumar Alias Chauhan vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 15 July 2022 · Citation: (2022) 07 UK CK 0079

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420, 506
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1191 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 373 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This is an application, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 530 of 2016, “State vs. Satyendra Hindwal and others”, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Uttarkashi, for the offence under Sections 420, 120B and 506 of IPC.

2.

Heard Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

3.

The applicant, Anuj Kumar Alias Chauhan and the respondent no. 2, Ranveer Singh Rajwar, informant/victim, are present in person before the Court. The applicant is identified by Mr. Akshay Latwal, Advocate and the respondent no. 2 is identified by Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Advocate.

4.

According to the prosecution, the applicant-accused along with co-accused persons had cheated the respondent no. 2 and took Rs. 3,00,000/- from him, but returned only Rs. 20,000/-, and, when the respondent no. 2 demanded his remaining amount, the applicant threatened to kill him.

5.

The applicant and the respondent no 2 submitted that they have resolved their disputes and after that, they filed a joint compounding application with their affidavits. The respondent no. 2 further submitted that he has filed his affidavit with his free will and without any pressure and he does not want to proceed with the said criminal case against the present applicant.

6.

The learned counsel for the State submitted that there were private disputes between the respondent no.2 and the applicant and they have resolved their disputes.

7.

Keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 530 of 2016, “State vs. Satyendra Hindwal and others”, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Uttarkashi, are quashed qua the applicant.

8.

Resultantly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 530 of 2016, “State vs. Satyendra Hindwal and others”, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Uttarkashi, are quashed qua the applicant.

9.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1191 of 2022, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is disposed of accordingly.