Mohd. Arif And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 3725 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                       NAINITAL
         Criminal Misc. Application No. 2094 of 2022

Mohd. Arif and others
                                                           ..... Petitioners
                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and another

                                                         .....Respondents

Mr. Avidit Noliyal, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State.

                             JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Challenge in this petition is made to the

cognizance order dated 15.11.2021, passed in Criminal

Case No. 671 of 2021, State Vs. Mohd. Rafi and others,

by the court of Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate,

Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, ("the case") as

well as the entire proceedings of the case, on the basis

of amicable settlement between the parties.

2. The case is based on an F.I.R., lodged by

respondent no.2-Ikbal (the informant). According to it,

on 02.07.2020, at 6.00 in the evening, the petitioners

entered in his house, abused and attacked him with

the Lathi, Danda, kicks and feet. In the said F.I.R.,

after the investigation, the charge-sheet has been

submitted and cognizance has been taken against the

petitioners.

3. Now, parties have filed a joint Compounding

Application No. 1 of 2022 along with affidavits of the

petitioners and the respondent no2.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

5. The petitioners, namely, Mohd. Arif, Mohf.

Rafi, Mohd. Matloob, Sarfaraj and Shane Alam, are

present in person before the Court, duly identified by

their counsel Mr. Avidit Noliyal, and respondent no.2-

Ikbal is also present in person before the Court, duly

identified by his counsel Mr. Gaurav Panwar.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners and

informant would submit that the parties to the

proceedings are the resident of the same village, and

they are amicably settled the dispute. The petitioners

have been summoned to answer the offences under

Sections 147, 323, 504 & 506 of I.P.C.

7. The informant-respondent no.2, made a

statement before this Court that they are neighbors,

and, therefore, he does not want to prosecute the

petitioners any further.

8. The contents of the settlement has been

verified by the parties and their respective counsel.

9. Learned counsel for the State would submit

that the offences are against the Society.

10. Having considered the nature of the offences,

the position of the parties, injuries, 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.

11. The instant petition is allowed. The

summoning/cognizance order dated 15.11.2021, as

well as the entire proceedings of the case, is hereby

quashed.

12. Compounding application stands disposed of

accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 22.11.2022

MR/PN