Kalawati Bisht And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 257 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

      Criminal Misc. Application No. 215 of 2022

Kalawati Bisht and others                            ........... Petitioners


                                    Vs.



State of Uttarakhand and another                   ........ Respondents



Present : Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioners,
           Mr. S.S. Adhikari, D.A.G with Mr. Balwinder Singh, Brief Holder for
the State/respondent no.1.
           Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate for the private respondent no.2.


                               JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

In the instant petition, the petitioners seek

quashing of the summoning order dated 13.03.2015,

passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Roorkee, District Hardwar, in Criminal Case No.276 of

2015, State vs. Mahendra Singh and others, under

Sections 498A, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act 1961 (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 through

video conferencing and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and

respondent no.2 and 3 would submit that parties have

entered into amicable settlement. The husband of the

victim has already expired post lodging of the FIR. The

trial is underway. The statement of some of the witnesses

have already been recorded, but the parties have settled

the dispute amicably. It being a matrimonial discord. No

fruitful purpose would be served, if the trial is allowed to

continue.

4. A Compounding Application No. 1 of 2022 has

been filed by the parties alongwith affidavits.

5. The victim and the informant, who are

respondent no.2 and 3 respectively, as identified by their

counsel have admitted before this Court that they have

entered into an amicable settlement.

6. The petitioners have also joined the proceedings

through video conferencing as identified by their counsel.

They have also admitted the factum of settlement between

the parties.

7. Since, it is a matrimonial discord, the parties

have settled the dispute amicably, therefore, no purpose

would be served, if the case is allowed to continue.

Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the petition may

be allowed on the basis of amicable settlement between

the parties.

8. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The

summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of the

case are hereby quashed.

9. Compounding application stands disposed of

accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 16.02.2022 Nahid