High CourtsSingle Bench

Satish Chandra vs State of Uttarakhand & others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 6 April 2017 · Citation: (2017) 04 UK CK 0006

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. Bist
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-376>Section 376</a> - Punishment for rape
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
451 of 2017
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

6 paragraphs · 428 words
1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the F.I.R. dated 03.08.2016, being Case Crime No. 04 of 2016, under Section 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Pokhari, District Chamoli. Alongwith this writ petition, affidavits have been filed by Mr. Satish Chandra (petitioner) and Mrs. Hema (respondent no.3). It is submitted by the learned counsel for the parties that the parties have entered into the compromise and the matter has been amicably settled between them and the respondent no. 3 does not want to press her case filed against the petitioner. It is prayed that the offences punishable under Section 376 of I.P.C., arising out of F.I.R. dated 03.08.2016, being Case Crime No. 04 of 2016, registered at Police Station Pokhari, District Chamoli may be compounded and the entire proceedings of F.I.R. dated 03.08.2016, being Case Crime No. 04 of 2016, under Section 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Pokhari, District Chamoli, may be quashed.

2.

Parties are present in the Court today and they are duly identified by their respective counsel.

3.

Mrs. Hema (respondent no.3) appeared before me and submitted that both of them were in love with each other and they got married with each other. She also submitted that, out of the wedlock, one male child is born. She further submitted that, at the behest of her relatives, impugned F.I.R. was lodged by her against the petitioner.

4.

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.

5.

Having considered submission of learned counsel for the parties and after going through the entire material available on record and also considering the statement of respondent no. 3 that they were in love and have got married and, out of the wedlock, one male child is born and now they are living happily, I am satisfied that the matter has been settled between the parties amicably. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

6.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned F.I.R. dated 03.08.2016, being Case Crime No. 04 of 2016, under Section 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Pokhari, District Chamoli, is hereby quashed.