Abrar Ahmad vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 1599 UK

   HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

      Criminal Misc. Application No. 744 of 2022

Abrar Ahmad                                           ........... Applicant



                                      Vs.



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



Present : Mr. Sadaf Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
          Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State.
          Ms. Divya Jaiswal, Advocate for the respondent no. 2.

                                    With

      Criminal Misc. Application No. 752 of 2022

Nadeem Chauhan                                        ........... Applicant



                                      Vs.



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



Present : Mr. Sadaf Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
          Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State.
          Ms. Divya Jaiswal, Advocate for the respondent no. 2.



                                JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Since, in both these petitions, the common

questions of facts and law are involved, they are being

decided by this common judgment.

2. By means of the instant petitions, the

petitioners seek quashing of the chargesheet dated

19.08.2015, cognizance order dated 01.10.2015, passed in

Criminal Case No. 3325 of 2015, State v. Nadeem

Chauhan & others, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,

120-B, 504, 506 IPC, by the court of Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Dehradun ("the case") as well as

the entire proceedings of the case, on the basis of

amicable settlement between the parties.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

4. Joint compounding applications have been filed

by the petitioner as well as the respondent no. 2 ("the

informant"), supported by the affidavits, in both the

petitions.

5. It is argued that the parties have settled the

dispute amicably. It is submitted that some of the

co-accused have already compounded the matter in

Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 1192 of 2018.

6. The petitioners and the informant are

personally present before the Court, duly identified by

their respective counsel. They have verified the contents of

the compounding applications and stated that they have

settled the dispute amicably.

7. The Court particularly asked the informant. He

would submit that he has settled the dispute amicably

and now he does not want to proceed with the case.

8. Having considered, 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 petitions

deserve to be allowed.

9. The petitions are allowed. The chargesheet

dated 19.08.2015, cognizance order dated 01.10.2015 as

well as the entire proceeding of the case are hereby

quashed.

10. Compounding applications stand disposed of

accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 24.05.2022 Avneet/