High CourtsSingle Bench

Yash Solanki And Karam Solanki vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 10 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 UK CK 0030

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 498A, 504, 506 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 849 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

12 paragraphs · 391 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

The applicants - accused persons have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the impugned cognizance/ summoning order dated 02.02.2022 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.94 of 2022, “State vs. Yash Solanki and Another”, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vikasnagar, Dehradun.

2.

Subsequent to the submission of the charge-sheet, the learned trial court took the cognizance and passed the summoning order against the present applicants under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3.

Heard Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. S.T. Bharadwaj, learned Deputy Advocate General the State and Mr. Anant Dhaka, learned counsel for the respondent no.2/informant/victim.

4.

Both the applicants, namely, Yash Solanki and Karam Solanki, are present in-person before the Court and they are identified by Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate.

5.

The respondent no.2 Smt. Saumya Verma, informant/victim is present in-person before this Court and she is identified by Mr. Anant Dhaka, Advocate.

6.

Both, the applicants and the respondent no.2 submitted that they have resolved their matrimonial disputes and after resolving the said disputes, they have filed a joint Compounding Application (IA No.01 of 2022) along with affidavits with their free will and without any pressure.

7.

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

8.

The learned counsel for the State submitted that there were matrimonial disputes between the parties and they have resolved their matrimonial 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 cognizance/ summoning order dated 02.02.2022 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.94 of 2022, “State vs. Yash Solanki and Another”, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vikasnagar, Dehradun, are quashed.

10.

Resultantly, the impugned cognizance/ summoning order dated 02.02.2022 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.94 of 2022, “State vs. Yash Solanki and Another”, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vikasnagar, Dehradun, are quashed.

11.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.849 of 2022, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is disposed of accordingly.