High CourtsSingle Bench

Rahul Garg And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 6 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 UK CK 0001

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 399 Of 2021 (Under Section 482 Of The Code Of Criminal Procedure), (IA No. 01 Of 2022) Compounding Application
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

12 paragraphs · 404 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The applicants-accused persons have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the impugned charge-sheet, summoning order dated 22.08.2020 along with entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1055 of 2020 (Case Crime No.863 of 2019), pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar.

2.

Subsequent to submission of the charge-sheet, the learned trial court took cognizance and passed the impugned summoning order dated 22.08.2002 against the applicants-accused persons for the offence under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3.

Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and Mr. Aakib Ahmed, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

4.

The applicants, namely, Rahul Garg, Munna Lal Garg and Smt. Kamlesh are present in-person before this Court and they are identified by Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

5.

The respondent no.2, Smt. Uma, the informant/victim, is present in-person before this Court and she is identified by Mr. Aakib Ahmed, Advocate.

6.

The respondent no.2 and all the applicants submitted that they have resolved their disputes and after resolving their disputes, they have filed a Joint Compounding Applications along with their affidavits with their free will and without any pressure.

7.

The respondent no.2, Smt. Uma further submitted that she does not want to proceed with the said criminal case against the applicants.

8.

The learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that there were private disputes between the applicants and the respondent no.2 and they have resolved their disputes, therefore, the State has no objection.

9.

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 impugned charge-sheet, summoning order dated 22.08.2020 along with entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1055 of 2020 (Case Crime No.863 of 2019), pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar, are quashed.

10.

Resultantly, the impugned charge-sheet, summoning order dated 22.08.2020 along with entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1055 of 2020 (Case Crime No.863 of 2019), pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar, are hereby quashed.

11.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.399 of 2021, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stands disposed of accordingly.