High CourtsSingle Bench

DHIRAJ KHANNA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 24 May 2018 · Citation: (2018) 05 UK CK 0118

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. BIST, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 498A, 504 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4 · Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 693 of 2018 with CLMA No.6783 of 2018 (Compounding Application)

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

24 paragraphs · 464 words
1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the F.I.R. dated 27.2.2018, registered as FIR No.0042 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 323,

504 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Vasant Vihar, District Dehradun on the ground that the dispute has been

amicably settled between the parties and the offence has been compounded. Alongwith this writ petition, joint compounding application has also been

filed by the parties. In support of compounding application, affidavits have been filed by Mr. Dhiraj Khanna (petitioner) and Smt. Reeta Kumari

(respondent no.3). It is submitted by the learned counsel for the parties that the parties have entered into the compromise and the respondent no.3

does not wants to prosecute her case filed against the petitioner. It is prayed that the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323, 504 of IPC and

Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, arising out of F.I.R. dated 27.2.2018, registered as FIR No.0042 of 2018, registered at Police Station Vasant

Vihar, District Dehradun, may be compounded and the entire proceedings of the said F.I.R. may be quashed.Â

2.

Petitioner and complainant (respondent no.3) are present in the Court today and they are duly identified by their respective counsel. Petitioner and

complainant (respondent no.3) categorically stated that the dispute has been settled between them and there is no grievance remained between each

other and they are ready to compound the offences. Respondent no.3 stated that after filing the petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act,

1955, the respondent no.3 does not wants to proceed the criminal proceeding arising out of the aforesaid FIR, because the grievance of the respondent

no.3 has been settled from the petitioner.

3.

In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC

303 as well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal

proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested

to restore peace and harmony between them.Â

4.

Having considered submission of learned counsel for the parties and after going through the entire material available on record, I am satisfied that

the matter has been settled between the parties amicably. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.Â

5.

Compounding application is, accordingly, disposed of.Â

6.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned F.I.R. dated 27.2.2018, registered as FIR No.0042 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 323, 504 of

IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Vasant Vihar District Dehradun, is hereby quashed, so far it relates to the

petitioner.

Â