Uttarakhand High Court
Mohd. Afridi And Another ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 30 November, 2021
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application No. 1697 of 2021
Mohd. Afridi and another ........... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and another ........ Respondents
Present : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Ms. Sonika Khulbe, Brief Holder for the
State/respondent no.1.
Ms. Reema Rana, Advocate for the private respondent no.2.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
In the instant petition, the petitioners seek
quashing of the charge-sheet dated 01.08.2017,
summoning order dated 29.01.2018, under Sections 323,
504, 354 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, "SC/ST Act") in Special
Sessions Trial No.08 of 2018, State vs. Mohd. Afridi and
others, by the Court of District and Sessions Judge,
Haridwar (for short, "the case"), as well as the entire
proceedings of the case on the basis of amicable
settlement between the parties.
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, against the petitioners and others under
Sections 323, 504, 354 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)(ii)
of the SC/ST Act. According to it, in the evening of
11.05.2017, at 05:00 PM, when the informant and her
sister were going to answer the call of the nature, the
petitioners, who were on the motorcycle hit the informant
from behind and when opposed, they started beating the
informant and abused her with caste coloured remarks. It
is this FIR in which, after investigation, charge-sheet has
been submitted and proceedings of the case was
instituted.
4. The parties have also filed a joint compounding
application, supported by the affidavits of the petitioner
no.1 and the private respondent no.2.
5. The petitioners and the private respondent
no.2, are present before the Court, duly identified by their
respective counsel. They have accepted before the Court
that voluntarily they have settled the dispute.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the
private respondent no.2 would submit that the parties
have settled their dispute amicably.
7. The respondent no.2 is present with her
husband. She has stated that the petitioners and their
family members have tendered apology. They are the
residents of the same village and the matter has been
settled in the village. The husband of the respondent
no.2, as identified by her, has also affirmed before the
Court that this is a voluntary settlement arrived between
the parties and the parties are living in peace and
harmony now.
8. Having considered 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.
9. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The
charge-sheet, summoning order as well as the entire
proceedings of the case, is hereby quashed.
10. Compounding application stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
30.11.2021
Sanjay
