Allowed

Lal Singh v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Uttarakhand HC16 Dec 2015C482/1587/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 323, 354, 504, and 506 IPC. The court held that no useful purpose would be served in continuing prosecution given the amicable settlement between the parties and that the offences were not serious crimes against society.

What did the court decide?

The FIR under Sections 323, 354, 504, 506 IPC and criminal case no. 84 of 2015 were quashed, and CRMA no. 2182 of 2015 was disposed of.

Lal Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Uttarakhand HC (2015)

¶1

C-482 No. 1587 of 2015

¶2

Hon’ble Alok Singh, J.

¶3

Mr. Amish Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶4

Ms. Shruti Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.

¶5

Mr. Gopal K. Verma, Advocate for the respondent no. 3.

¶6

Lal Singh, petitioner, is present in person before this Court duly identified by Mr. Amish Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶7

Smt. Bishna Devi, victim/respondent no. 3, is also present before this Court duly identified by Mr. Gopal K. Verma, Advocate for the respondent no. 3.

¶8

Parties, present in person before me, have stated that since petitioner is brotherin-law of respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 3 is sister-in-law (wife of brother of the petitioner), therefore, they have settled their dispute amicably with the intervention of some elders and respective persons and in view of the mutual settlement arrived at between the parties, they are not interested in the prosecution.

¶9

Ms. Shruti Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State, submits that since none of the offences is serious crime against the society and parties have settled their dispute amicably, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the prosecution alive.

¶10

Having heard parties present in person before me and learned counsel appearing for the parties, I am of the opinion that since parties have settled their dispute amicably, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the prosecution alive.

¶11

Consequently, petition succeeds and is hereby allowed.

¶12

FIR Case Crime No. 01 of 2015 under Section 323, 354, 504, 506 IPC P.S. Saili Sunauli Dwarahat District Almora and consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No. 84 of 2015, State vs. Lal Singh, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Dwarahat, District Almora are hereby quashed.

¶13

CRMA No. 2182 of 2015 also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶14

Let copy of this order be forwarded to the Judicial Magistrate, Almora for information and compliance.

¶15

(Alok Singh, J.)

¶16

16.12.2015

¶17

Deepak

Lal Singh v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Singh v. State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhuwan Chandra Joshi Vs State Of Uttrakhand and Others

Tejpal Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Vicky @ Pradeep Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Zakir Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Sardar Baldev Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand

Srikant Vs State Of Uttarakhand