Parvez And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of the present C482 application, the applicants have put to challenge the summoning/cognizance order dated 18.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Case No.2282 of 2019 and Misc. Case No.509 of 2021 State Vs. Pravez and Others, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498-A IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant No.1 and under Section 498-A IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant Nos.2 & 3, arising out of FIR No.37 of 2019 dated 25.01.2019 registered with police station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar as well as the entire proceedings of the above criminal case, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties.

Along with the present C482 application, a joint compounding application (IA/2/2025) is filed duly supported by separate affidavits by applicants and respondent No.2

In the compounding application, it has been stated that the parties have amicably resolved all their disputes through a mutual settlement and there are no pending issues between them, therefore, the respondent No.2-complainant doesn’t want to pursue with the case anymore.

Applicants-Parvez, Taherrunisha, Abdul and respondent No.2-Nasreen are present through V.C., who are duly identified by their respective counsels. On interaction, respondent No.2 categorically stated that the divorce petition has already been filed, which is pending and the matter is now amicably settled by them, therefore, she wants to end the matter.

Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable.

In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble 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 the Court, if the Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested to restore peace and harmony between them.

Having considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the compounding application as well as the documents available on record, this Court is of the view that if the parties do not wish to pursue with the criminal proceedings anymore and they have settled their dispute amicably, it would not be useful for referring the applicant to Court to face the trial and it would amount to a futile exercise. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, nothing remains to be decided in the present matter.

Accordingly, compounding application (IA/2/2025) is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2282 of 2019 and Misc. Case No. 509 of 2021 State Vs. Pravez and Others, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498-A IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant No.1 and under Section 498-A IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant Nos.2 & 3, is hereby quashed. Resultantly, FIR No.37 of 2019 dated 25.01.2019 registered with police station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar stands quashed.

Accordingly, the present C482 application is disposed of in terms of the compromise.