Sanjay Bisht Alias Sanjay Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Sl. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS

C482 No.2455 of 2023 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

¶1Mr. Sumit Bajaj, learned counsel for the applicants.

¶2Mr. Saurabh Pandey, learned Brief Holder assisted by Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶3Mr. Nalin Saun, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

¶4The instant application preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. along with the compounding application, which is also supported with the affidavits of each of the applicants and the respondent no.2.

¶5The present applicants are facing trial in Criminal Case No. 5961 of 2020, arising out of FIR No.0151 of 2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498A IPC, which is pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital.

¶6The applicant no.1 Sanjay Bisht married with the respondent no.2 on

05.06.2013, and their son was born in the year 2014, due to this wedlock. Applicant nos. 2 and 3 are the parents of the applicant no.1, and as such the in-laws of the respondent no.2.

¶7It is contended in the compounding application that due to some misunderstanding, the FIR was lodged, in which, after investigation, the chargesheet was filed.

¶8It is also contended in the compounding application that now at present, the applicant no.1 and the respondent no.2 are living together with their family and there is no dispute, and they are living happily.

¶9The applicant nos. 2 and 3, who are the parents of the applicant no.1 are also happy with the amicable settlement entered between the applicant no.1 and the respondent no.2, and this Court also interacted with each of them, including the applicant nos. 2 and 3, the in-laws of the respondent no.2, and they submit that there is no dispute and they are very happy that the applicant no.1 and the respondent no.2 are living together, which is voluntarily accepted by the in-laws of the respondent no. 2. It also gives a very good message to the society.

¶10Per Contra, learned State Counsel submits that offence punishable under Section is not compoundable, however, he submits that the allegations, as appear, are nothing but matrimonial in nature, and as the respondent no.2 is now residing with her husband, the applicant no.1, along with their son, therefore, this compounding application can be allowed.

¶11After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and the grounds, as taken in the compounding application, and further after taking into consideration the arguments, as advanced by learned State Counsel, this Court is of the view that the compounding application deserves to be allowed.

¶12The compounding application is allowed.

¶13The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5961 of 2020, arising out of FIR No.0151 of 2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498A IPC, which is pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital, are quashed.

¶14Accordingly, the C-482 application stands disposed of.

( Rak esh Th apliy al, J.)

28.12.2023 Reena