High CourtsSingle Bench

Rakesh Dhingra vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 7 July 2022 · Citation: (2022) 07 UK CK 0044

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 498A, 506 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1132 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

14 paragraphs · 435 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. 5231 of 2020, “State of Uttarakhand vs. Rakesh Dhingra”, pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate/1st Additional Civil Judge/ (Junior Division), Udham Singh Nagar.

2.

Subsequent to the submission of the charge-sheet, the learned trial court took cognizance and passed the summoning order for the offence under Sections 498A, 323, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the present applicant-accused.

3.

Heard Mr. Mani Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rohit Dhyani, the learned Brief Holder for the State and Mr. Kishore Rai, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

4.

The applicant-accused Rakesh Dhingra, husband of the respondent no. 2, is present in-person before this Court and he is identified by Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate.

5.

The respondent no.2- Smt. Neetu, informant/victim, is present in-person before this Court and she is identified by Mr. Kishore Rai, Advocate.

6.

Both, the applicant and the respondent no. 2 submitted that there were matrimonial disputes between them. They have resolved their matrimonial disputes and after resolving their disputes, they are living as husband and wife.

7.

The applicant and the respondent no. 2 further submitted that they have filed a joint compounding application along with their affidavits with their free will and without any pressure.

8.

The respondent no. 2 submitted that she does not want to proceed with the said criminal case.

9.

The learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that there were matrimonial disputes between the parties and they have resolved their disputes, therefore, the State has no objection to the compounding application.

10.

It is a fit case, in which the inherent jurisdiction of this Court should be exercised to do real and substantial justice.

11.

Keeping in view of the totality of the fact 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. 5231 of 2020, “State of Uttarakhand vs. Rakesh Dhingra”, pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate/1st Additional Civil Judge/ (Junior Division), Udham Singh Nagar, are quashed.

12.

Resultantly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5231 of 2020, “State of Uttarakhand vs. Rakesh Dhingra”, pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate/1st Additional Civil Judge/ (Junior Division), Udham Singh Nagar, are quashed.

13.

The Criminal Misc. Application (No. 1132 of 2022), filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is disposed of accordingly.