Allowed

Vikas Vishwas v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Dec 2021C482/1229/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand, in an oral judgment, allowed a criminal misc. application seeking quashing of summoning orders and criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 452, 504, and 506 IPC. The court held that the dispute between the petioners and the complainant's wife has been amicably settled after the husband's death, and the neighbours are now living in peace.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the summoning order dated 27.04.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4370 of 2015.

Vikas Vishwas Vs State of Uttarakhand — Quashing and FIR | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1229 of 2021

¶3

Vikas Vishwas and others ......Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Uttarakhand and another ….Respondents

¶6

Present:

¶7

Mr. Vikas Kumar Guglani, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. for the State. Mr. Devendra Mehra, Advocate for the respondent no.2.

¶8

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

¶9

Challenge in this petition is made to the summoning order dated 27.04.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4370 of 2015, Neeraj Kumar Vs. Vikas Vishwas and others, pending in the court of 1^st Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar (for short, “the case”) on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties.

¶10

The case is based on the complaint filed by the husband of respondent no.2 Neeraj Kumar. According to it, on 12.08.2015, the petitioners entered into the house of respondent no.2 and assaulted her husband with kicks and fists. It is this complaint, in which, after

¶11

¶12

inquiry under Section 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by an order dated 27.04.2016, summoned under Section 323, 452, 504 and 506 IPC. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that parties have amicably settled the dispute.

¶13

Now, parties have filed a joint Compounding Application No. 1 of 2021 along with affidavits of the petitioner no.1 Sh. Vikas Vishwas and the respondent no2. Smt. Rani Devi, wife of the complainant.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶15

The petitioners except petitioner no.3 Sh. Satyajit Vishwas are present in person before this Court, duly identified by his counsel Mr. Vikas Kumar Guglani. The respondent no.2 wife of the complainant is also present in person before this Court duly identified by his counsel Devendra Mehra.

¶16

It is submitted that petitioner no.3 is not well. Respondent no.2, wife of the complainant has verified all the contents of the compromise before the Court. According to her, her husband has died and now she does not want to prosecute the petitioners.

¶17

¶18

In the instant case, the parties have settled the dispute amicably. They are neighbours and living in peace and harmony.

¶19

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.

¶20

The instant petition is allowed. summoning order dated 27.04.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of the case is hereby quashed.

¶21

Compounding application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶22

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 01.12.2021

¶23

Jitendra

Vikas Vishwas v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Vishwas v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Neetu Bisht Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mahipal Singh Kalakoti Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Afridi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Aashit Bala Vs State of Uttarakhand

Abdul Khalid Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dharmenra Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand