Naseem And Others Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Uttarakhand High Court 12 Sep 2024 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 473 Of 2024, Compounding Application IA No. 1 Of 2024 (2024) 09 UK CK 0108
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 473 Of 2024, Compounding Application IA No. 1 Of 2024

Hon'ble Bench

Ravindra Maithani, J

Advocates

Pradeep Chamyal, Bhaskar Ch. Joshi, B.M. Pingal

Final Decision

Allowed/ Disposed Of

Acts Referred
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 323, 498A, 504, 506
  • Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Section 3, 4

Judgement Text

Translate:

Ravindra Maithani, J

1. The petitioners Naseem, Hazara, Chotte Khan and Shifa Khan seek quashing of the Chargesheet No.180 of 2024, dated 31.05.2024 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar, Cognizance/ Summoning Order dated 08.07.2024, passed in Criminal Case No.389 of 2024, State Vs. Naseem Khan and Others, by the court of Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Sitarganj, Distgrict Udham Singh Nagar (“the case”) as well as the entire proceedings of the case, on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties. A joint compounding application has been filed along with the affidavits.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. The case is based on an FIR lodged by the respondent no.2. According to it, she and the petitioner Naseem were married on 08.05.2023, but after marriage, the respondent no.2 was harassed and tortured for and in connection with the demand of dowry by the petitioners. The FIR is quite in detail. It is this FIR, in which after investigation, chargsheet was submitted and cognizance taken.

4. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that it is a matrimonial dispute and the parties have amicably settled the dispute.

5. The petitioners Naseem, Hazara, Chotte Khan, Shifa Khan as well as the respondent no.2 are present before the Court, as identified by their respective counsel. They have accepted the compromise.

6. The Court particularly asked the respondent no.2. She would submit that she does not want to continue with the marriage now, and she has settled the dispute with the petitioners.

7. Having considered the nature of offence and all the attending factors, this Court is of the view that it is a case, which may be decided on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed.

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The chargesheet dated 31.05.2024, Cognizance/ Summoning Order dated 08.07.2024, as well as the entire proceedings of the case, are hereby quashed.

9. Compounding Application No. 01 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More